Juan Gonzalez-Flores v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 575 F. App'x 731 ( 2014 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 23 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN ALBERTO GONZALEZ-FLORES, No. 11-73158
Petitioner, Agency No. A200-000-631
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.
Juan Alberto Gonzalez-Flores, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, petitions
pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing
his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for
asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
*
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 review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Santos-Lemus v.
Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and grant in part the
petition for review, and we remand.
The record does not compel the conclusion that Gonzalez-Flores established
changed or extraordinary circumstances sufficient to excuse his untimely filed
asylum application. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.4(a)(4), (5). Accordingly, we deny the
petition as to his asylum claim.
In denying Gonzalez-Flores’s withholding of removal claim, the BIA found
Gonzalez-Flores failed to establish past persecution or 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 either this court’s decisions in Henriquez-
Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), and Cordoba v. Holder,
726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013), 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 grant the petition as to Gonzalez-Flores’s withholding of removal
claim, and remand to the agency to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions.
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
The parties shall bear their own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.
2 11-73158