Carlos Humberto Mendez Vasquez v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 585 F. App'x 680 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           NOV 25 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    CARLOS HUMBERTO MENDEZ                           No. 10-73589
    VASQUEZ,
    Agency Nos.         A097-365-651
    Petitioner,
    v.
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,           MEMORANDUM*
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted November 18, 2014**
    Before:        LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    Carlos Humberto Mendez Vasquez, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
    petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his
    appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,
    withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
    *
    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).
    We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
    factual findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 
    453 F.3d 1182
    , 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and
    we review de novo due process claims, Liu v. Holder, 
    640 F.3d 918
    , 930 (9th Cir.
    2011). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.
    Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
    Vasquez failed to establish that it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or
    with the acquiescence of the government of Guatemala. See Silaya v. Mukasey,
    
    524 F.3d 1066
    , 1073 (9th Cir. 2008).
    We reject Vasquez’s due process contention. See Lata v. INS, 
    204 F.3d 1241
    , 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (petitioner must show error to establish a due process
    violation).
    In denying Vasquez’s asylum and withholding of removal claims, the
    agency found Vasquez failed to establish a fear of future persecution on account of
    a protected ground. When the IJ and BIA issued their decisions in this case they
    did not have the benefit of this court’s decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 
    707 F.3d 1081
    (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), Cordoba v. Holder, 
    726 F.3d 1106
    (9th Cir.
    2013), and Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 
    750 F.3d 1077
    (9th Cir. 2014), or the BIA’s
    decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of
    W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Thus, we remand Vasquez’s asylum and
    2                                     10-73589
    withholding of removal claims to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions.
    See INS v. Ventura, 
    537 U.S. 12
    , 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
    Each party shall bear their own costs for this petition for review.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
    REMANDED.
    3                                  10-73589