Mirna Selene Gil-Dominguez v. Merrick Garland ( 2022 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 22 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MIRNA SELENE GIL-DOMINGUEZ, No. 21-74
Petitioner, Agency No. A202-014-732
v.
MEMORANDUM
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 12, 2022**
Before: SCHROEDER, R. NELSON, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
Mirna Selene Gil-Dominguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying her appeal from
an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for withholding of
removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947
F.3d 1238, 1241 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny the petition for review.

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).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Gil-
Dominguez failed to establish that she is more likely than not to face a threat to
life or freedom on account of a protected ground. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(2);
Tamang v. Holder, 598 F.3d 1083, 1091 (9th Cir. 2010) (“[T]he petitioner must
show a ‘clear probability’ of the threat to life or freedom if deported to his or
her country of nationality.”); see also id. at 1094 (claim of future persecution
weakened when similarly-situated family members continue to live in the
country without incident). Thus, her withholding of removal claim fails.
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.
The motion for a stay of removal is otherwise denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2