T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T AN T ON I O C AN E C E S - GA R C I A, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 73238 A ge nc yN o. A 098- 806- 605 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d June 29, 2010 ** B efo re: A L A R C Ó N , L E A V Y , an dG R A B E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A n t o n i o C an eces-G arci a, a n at i v e an dci t i zen o f G u at em al a, p et i t i o n s p ro se for r evi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order a ff i rm i ng an i m m i grat i on j ud ge’ s dec i si on denyi ng hi s app l i cat i on for w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al a nd r e l i e f

unde rthe C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e ( “ C A T ” ) . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on 

# FI LED JU L 16 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 73238 2 u n d e r8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o q u e s tio n s o f law , C er ez o v. Mukasey , 5 1 2 F .3 d1 1 6 3 , 1 1 6 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) , e x c e p t to th e e x te n t th a t d e f e r e n c e is o w e dto th e B I A ’s d e te rm in a tio n o f th e g o v e rn in g s ta tu te s a n dr e g u la tio n s , Si m eono v v . A s h c r o ft , 371 F . 3d 532, 535 ( 9th C i r . 2004) . W e r e vi e w f a c tua l f i ndi ngs f or s ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e . Zehat ye v. G on zales , 45 3 F . 3d 11 82 , 11 84 -85 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 6 ) . We d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. W e r ej ec tpet i t i on er ’ s c l ai m thathe i s e l i gi bl e f or w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al ba s e d upon a n i m put e d ant i - gang pol i t i c a l opi ni on orhi s m e m be r s hi p i n a p a rtic u lars o c ia l g r o up . See B arri os v. H older , 58 1 F . 3d 84 9, 85 4-56 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 9 ) ; Sa ntos-L em us v. Mukasey , 542 F . 3d 738, 746- 47 ( 9th C i r . 2008) ( hol di ng thata “ generalaver si on t o g angs do es no tconst i tut e apo l i t i ca l op i ni on ”) ; P arussim ova v. Mukasey , 55 5 F . 3d 73 4, 74 0 (9th C i r. 20 09 ) ( “ [t ] he R ea l ID A ct r e qui r e s tha tapr ot e c t e d gr ound r e pr e s e nt‘ one c e ntr a l r e a s on’ f ora n a s y l um ap p lic a n t’s p e r s e c u tio n ” ) . A c c o r d in g ly , b e c au s e p e titio n e rf a ile dto d e m o n s tr a te th a th e wa s p e r s e c u t e do rf e ar s p e r s e c u t i o n o n a c c o u n to f ap r o t e c t e dg r o u n d , we d e n yth e p e titio n a s to h is w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l c la im . Se e B arr i os , 58 1 F . 3d at 856. S ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e s up p o rts th e B I A ’s f in d in g th a t p e titio n e rf

a ile dto de m ons tr a t e i ti s m or e l i ke l ythan nothe w oul d be t ortur e d by , ora tthe i ns t i ga t i on08- 73238 3 o f , o rw ith th e c o n s e n t o ra c q u ie s c e n c e o f ap ub lic o f

f ic ia l if r e tu rn e dto G u a te m a la , an dth e r e f

o r e w e d e n yth e p e titio n a s to p e titio n e r ’s C A T c la im . See Santos -L e m us , 542 F . 3d a t747- 48. F i na l l y , pe t i t i one r ’ s c ont e nt i on tha tthe B I A f a i l e d t o a rt i c ul a t e i t s r e a s ons f o rd e n y in g r e lie f

is n o t s up p o rte db yth e r e c o r d . Se e La ta v . I NS , 204 F . 3d 1241, 12 46 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.