Case ID: f-appx_620/html/0632-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Santos Reyes Lopez DE LEON, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 11-72307.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 14, 2015.
    
    Filed Oct. 21, 2015.
    Jaime Jasso, Esquire, Law Offices of Jaime Jasso, Westlake Village, CA, for Petitioner.
    Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Andrew B. Insenga, Trial, Oil, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: SILVERMAN, BYBEE, 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

Santos Reyes Lopez de Leon, a native and citizen of Guatemala, 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 and withholding of removal. 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), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Lopez de Leon’s experiences with guerrillas, even cumulatively, did not rise to the level of persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2003). We reject Lopez de Leon’s contention that the BIA engaged in impermissible fact-finding. Because Lopez de Leon did not establish past persecution, he is not entitled to a presumption of future fear of persecution. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.13(b)(1), 1208.16(b)(1)(f). Thus, Lopez de Leon’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.

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