Case ID: f-appx_574/html/0758-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Juan Jose ACEVEDO-ALVAREZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 12-72721.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted May 13, 2014.
    
    Filed May 20, 2014.
    Deok Kim, Law Offices of Deok J. Kim, San Jose, CA, for Petitioner.
    OIL, David Schor, Trial, Aric Allan Anderson, Trial, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Juan Jose Acevedo-Alvarez, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s denial of relief under CAT, Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Acevedo-Alvarez’s CAT claim because he failed to demonstrate it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Nicaraguan government if returned. See id. at 1073; see also Go v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1047, 1054 (9th Cir.2011) (concluding country reports and petitioner’s credible testimony were insufficient to compel the conclusion that petitioner met his burden of proof for CAT). Accordingly, Acevedo-Alvarez’s CAT claim fails.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.