N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT C HRISTIAN ER

NESTO R ODRIGUEZR ODRIGUEZ, Pe titioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 08-70065 Age n c y No. A097-558-094 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d August 13, 2014 ** B e fore : SC HR O EDER , THOM AS, and HUR W ITZ, C i rc uit Judge s . C hristia n Erne sto Rodrigue z -R odrigue z , a native and c itiz e n of El Sa lva dor, pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism issing his a

ppe a l from

an im m igration judge ’ s (“ IJ” ) de c ision de ny ing his a pplic ation for a s y lum , withholding of rem ova l, a nd re lie f unde r the C onve ntion



# FIL ED AUG 20 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).Aga inst Torture(“ C AT” ). W e have jurisdic tion under 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e

re vie w for substa

ntia l e vide nc e fa c tua l findings. Ze haty ev . Gonzale s , 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th C ir. 2006). W e de ny in pa rt a nd gra nt in pa rt the pe tition for re vie w, a nd we re m and. The a ge n c y

de nie d R o drigue z -R odrigue z ’ s a sy lum a pplic ation a s tim e ba rre d. R odrigue z -R odrigue zdoe s not c ha l le nge this finding in his ope ning brie f. In de ny ing Rodrigue z -R odrigue z ’ s withholding of re m ova l c la im , the a ge nc y found R o d

rigue z -R odrigue zfa ile d to e sta blish a fe ar of future pe rse c ution on a c c o unt of a

prote c te d ground. W

he n the IJ a

nd B IA issue d the ir de c isions in this c a s e the y

did not ha

ve the be ne fit of this c ourt’ s de c i sions in He n rique z-Riv as v . Holde r , 707 F.3d 1081 (9th C ir. 2013) (e n ba nc ), C ordoba v . Holde r , 726 F.3d 1106 (9th C ir. 2013), a

nd P irir-Boc

v . Holde r , 750 F.3d 1077 (9th C ir. 2014), or the B IA’ s de c isions in M atte r of M-E-V-G- , 26 I. & N. De c . 227 (B IA 2014), a nd Matte r of W -G-R- , 26 I. & N. De c . 208 (B IA 2014). Thus, we re m and R odrigue z R odrigue z ’ s withholding of re m ova l c la im

to de t e rm i ne the im

pa c t, if a ny , of the se de c isions. Se eIN

S v . Ve n tura , 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (pe r c uriam ). In a ddition, the

B IA a ppe are d to ha

ve re lie d on thee xiste nc e of gove rnm e nt c orruption in deny ing Ro drigue z -R odrigue z ’ s withholding of re m ova l c la im , but did not c onside r gove rnm e nt c o rruption in its a na ly sis of his C AT c la im . W e 0 8 - 7 0 0 6 5 2re m and R odrigue z -R odrigue z ’ s C AT c l a im for the a ge nc y

to c onside r the im

pa c t of gove rnm e nt c o rruption on its a na ly sis of sta

te a c tion. Se eid .; s e ealso Madrigal v . Holde r , 716 F.3d 499, 509-510 (9th C ir. 2013). Fina lly , we de ny

a s m oot Rodrigue z -R odrigue z ’ s m otion to re m and. Ea c h pa rty sha ll be a r its own c osts for this petition for re vie w . PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D in par t; G RANT E D in par t. RE M A NDE D.

0 8 - 7 0 0 6 5 3