NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 30 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ZI-JUN MA, No. 09-72587 Petitioner, Agency No. A095-300-762 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 23, 2017** Before: McKEOWN, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Zi-Jun Ma, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, 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. Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review. We do not consider the materials Ma references in his opening brief that are not part of the administrative record. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 963-64 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Ma failed to demonstrate a nexus between the harm he suffered and fears and a protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n.1 (1992) (“To reverse the BIA finding we must find that the evidence not only supports that conclusion, but compels it[.]”). Thus, Ma’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Ma failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Chinese government. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (2009). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 09-72587 09-72587 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Zi-Jun Ma v. Jefferson Sessions 30 October 2017 Agency Unpublished 8820192a0b1e809eedbf331d01adc64b48077b35
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals