Case ID: f-appx_404/html/0190-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gregorio VASQUEZ TELLO; Elvia Lopez Vasquez; et al., Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 08-70424.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 16, 2010.
    
    Filed Nov. 22, 2010.
    Jovi G. Usude, Esquire, Law Offices of Jovi G. Usude, Van Nuys, CA, for Petitioner.
    OIL, Cindy S. Ferrier, Senior Litigation Counsel, Daniel Eric Goldman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, Mona Maria Yousif, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District 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

Gregorio Vasquez Tello and Elvia Lopez Vasquez, and their family, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order reversing an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision granting withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 998 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA reversed the IJ’s grant of relief after finding the evidence was sufficient to rebut the presumption that Vasquez Tello’s life or freedom would be threatened in the future. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion. See id. at 998-1001. Accordingly, we deny the petition as to petitioners’ withholding of removal claim.

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