Case ID: f-appx_404/html/0198-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Alejandro MARIN-POSADA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-74389.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 16, 2010.
    
    Filed Nov. 22, 2010.
    Simon Salinas, Esquire, Tustin, CA, for Petitioner.
    Joanne E. Johnson, Esquire, Arthur Leonid Rabin, Anh-Thu P. Mai-Windle, Senior Litigation Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Alejandro Marin-Posada, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings. INS v. EliasZacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 & n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Marin Posada failed to demonstrate the urban guerrillas targeted him on account of his membership in a particular social group or based on an actual or imputed political opinion. See Gormley v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.2004). Because Marin-Posada failed to demonstrate he was or will be persecuted on account of a protected ground, his asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 856 (9th Cir.2009).

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