NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 12 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SANTOS R. LOPEZ-RIVERA, AKA No. 15-72838 SANTOS ROGELIO LOPEZ, Agency No. A 095-008-224 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 5, 2019** Pasadena, California Before: FARRIS, MCKEOWN, and PARKER, *** Circuit Judges. * 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). *** The Honorable Barrington D. Parker, Jr., United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting by designation. Petitioner Santos R. Lopez-Rivera, a native and citizen of El Salvador, seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) order affirming the decision of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Lopez- Rivera contends that he is eligible for asylum and withholding of removal because he has a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of his membership in a “particular social group.” See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(1)(42)(A) (asylum), 1231(b)(3) (withholding of removal). He describes his social group “as returning Salvadorans, accompanied by minor United States citizen children, who become targets of violence perpetrated by local gangs and associated criminal elements, including corrupt law enforcement, who the Salvadoran government is unable or unwilling to control.” Pet’r’s Br. at 1-2. Lopez-Rivera also contends that he has established the need for protection under CAT. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a) and deny the petition.1 Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Lopez-Rivera did not establish that any harm he fears in El Salvador would be on account of his membership in a “particular social group.” Lopez-Rivera testified before the IJ 1 The facts are familiar to the parties and are restated here only as necessary to resolve the issues of the petition for review. -2- that he fears returning to El Salvador due to general corruption and because gangs would target him as they would perceive him as having money. However, as we have previously held, a “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground.” Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, Lopez-Rivera’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. Id. at 1015-16. Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s finding that Lopez-Rivera has not established his membership in a “particular social group.” Like “similar cases involving the type of . . . social group alleged by [Lopez-Rivera],” his proposed social group “is too broad to qualify as a cognizable social group.” See, e.g., Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1151-52 (“Petitioners’ proposed social group, returning Mexicans from the United ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals