Fabio Castro-Palomo v. Eric Holder, Jr. ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FABIO CASTRO-PALOMO, No. 09-72394
Petitioner, Agency No. A079-666-300
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 14, 2010 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Fabio Castro-Palomo, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions 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.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence,
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Castro-Palomo failed
to establish he was or will be persecuted by guerillas on account of a protected
ground. See Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 865-66 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Asylum
generally is not available to victims of civil strife....”); Parussimova v. Mukasey,
555 F.3d 734, 740-41 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[t]he Real ID Act requires that a protected
ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s persecution”).
Accordingly, his withholding of removal claim fails. See Ochave, 254 F.3d at 868.
We reject Castro-Palomo’s contentions that the agency violated his due
process rights by failing to fully transcribe his merits hearing and issuing a
boilerplate decision. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2006)
(requiring error and substantial prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-72394