Carlos Chapen Morales v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 573 F. App'x 646 ( 2014 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 19 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARLOS CHAPEN MORALES, No. 12-71632
Petitioner, Agency No. A072-691-036
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 13, 2014**
Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Carlos Chapen Morales, 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”). We have
*
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).
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
deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Chapen Morales
failed to establish that he suffered harm rising to the level of persecution. See Li v.
Ashcroft, 356 F.3d 1153, 1158 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (describing persecution as
“an extreme concept”). Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s finding
that Chapen Morales did not demonstrate that he has a well-founded fear of future
persecution on account of a protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S.
478, 483 (1992) (petitioner must provide some evidence of the persecutor’s
motive); see also Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010). Thus,
Chapen Morales’s asylum claim fails.
Because Chapen Morales failed to meet the lower burden of proof for
asylum, it follows that he has not met the higher standard for withholding of
removal. See Zehatye, 453 F.3d at 1190.
The record does not compel the conclusion that it is more likely than not that
Chapen Morales will be tortured by or with the acquiescence of the Guatemalan
government. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.