NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 15 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RUDY ROBLERO, No. 16-70538 Petitioner, Agency No. A095-773-871 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted July 12, 2022** Before: SCHROEDER, R. NELSON, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges. Rudy Roblero, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Roblero failed to establish that the harm he experienced or fears was or will be on account of a protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483 (1992) (an applicant “must provide some evidence of [motive], direct or circumstantial”); see also Pagayon v. Holder, 675 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2011) (a personal dispute, standing alone, does not constitute persecution on account of a protected ground); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, Roblero’s withholding of removal claim fails. In light of this disposition, we need not reach his remaining contentions regarding the merits of his claim. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required to decide issues unnecessary to the results they reach). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection because Roblero failed to show that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to 2 16-70538 Guatemala. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 16-70538 16-70538 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Rudy Roblero v. Merrick Garland 15 July 2022 Agency Unpublished 2c50ffb02aa540766b77bd1e9c60a308923d3b76
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals