Juan Banda-Huerta v. Jefferson Sessions ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                               NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MAY 21 2018
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    JUAN JESUS BANDA-HUERTA,                        No.    16-73809
    Petitioner,                     Agency No. A205-647-890
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
    General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted May 15, 2018**
    Before:      SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    Juan Jesus Banda-Huerta, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) 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 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).
    We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
    the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 
    453 F.3d 1182
    , 1184-85 (9th
    Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
    Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Banda-Huerta
    failed to establish that any harm his family experienced or that he fears in Mexico
    was or would be on account of a protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 
    622 F.3d 1007
    , 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by
    criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus
    to a protected ground”). We do not address Banda-Huerta’s contentions as to his
    alleged membership in or the cognizability of the social group of his family,
    because the BIA did not rely on these bases in denying relief. See Santiago-
    Rodriguez v. Holder, 
    657 F.3d 820
    , 829 (9th Cir. 2011) (“In reviewing the decision
    of the BIA, we consider only the grounds relied upon by that agency.”) (citation
    and internal quotation marks omitted). Thus, in the absence of a nexus to a
    protected ground, Banda-Huerta’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
    Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
    Banda-Huerta failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be tortured by
    or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See
    Ramirez-Munoz v. Lynch, 
    816 F.3d 1226
    , 1230 (9th Cir. 2016).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                      16-73809
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-73809

Filed Date: 5/21/2018

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021