Oscar Arevalo-Jaimes v. Jefferson Sessions ( 2018 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 19 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
OSCAR AREVALO-JAIMES, AKA Oscar No. 16-71372
Arevalo,
Agency No. A090-497-353
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Oscar Arevalo-Jaimes, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
*
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).
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
findings, Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011), and we deny the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Arevalo-
Jaimes failed to establish that any harm he fears in Mexico would be on account of
his family membership or any other protected ground. See Ayala, 640 F.3d at 1097
(even if membership in a particular social group is established, an applicant must
still show that “persecution was or will be on account of his membership in such
group” (emphasis in original)); 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”).
Thus, Arevalo-Jaimes’ withholding of removal claim fails.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Arevalo-Jaimes’
CAT claim because he failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be
tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to
Mexico. See Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir. 2010)
(generalized evidence of violence and crime in Mexico is not particular to
petitioner and is insufficient to meet the CAT standard).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 16-71372