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 E VE L YN B E AT R I Z ME J I ARODRI GU EZ , 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- 74405 A ge nc yN o. A 098- 263- 612 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 N ove m be r16, 2010 ** B efo re: T A S H IM A , B E R Z O N , an dC L IF T O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. E vel yn B eatri z M ej i a- R od ri gu ez , a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f E l S al vado r, pet i t i on s f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng her app ea l fr om an i m m i grat i on j ud ge’ s dec i si on denyi ng her appl i c a t i on f

ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , a nd r e l i e f

unde rthe C onve nt i on 

# FI LED NO V 19 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 74405 2 A g a in s t T o rtu r e ( “C A T ” ) . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n 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 i r . 2008) , e xc e ptt o the e xt e nttha tde f e r e nc e i s ow e d t o the B I A ’ s de t e rm i na t i on 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 , S im e o n o vv . A s h c r o ft , 371 F . 3d 532, 535 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . W e r e v ie w f a c tu a l f in d in g s f o rs ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e . Zehat ye v. G on zales , 453 F . 3d 1182, 1184- 85 ( 9th C i r . 2006) . W e de nythe pe t i t i on f or r e v i e w. W e r e j e c tpe t i t i one r ’ s c l a i m tha ts he i s e l i gi bl e f ora s y l um orw i thhol di ng of r e m ova l ba s e d upon an ant i - gang pol i t i c a l opi ni on orhe rm e m be r s hi p i n a part i c ul a rs oc i a l gr oup, na m e l y , pa rt i e s w ho r e f us e t o j oi n orbe c oe r c e d by c r im in a l g an g s . See Sa ntos-L em us v. Mukasey , 54 2 F . 3d 73 8, 74 5-46 (9th C i r. 2008) ( r e j e c t i ng a s apart i c ul ars oc i a l gr oup “ y oung m e n i n E l S a l va dorr e s i s t i ng gang vi ol ence , ” and ho l di ng thatgeneralaver si on t o g angs i s nota pol i t i ca l o p in io n ” ) ; se e al

so P arussim ova v. Mukasey , 555 F . 3d 734, 740- 41 ( 9th C i r . 2009) ( “ [ t ] he R e a l I D A c tr 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 o ran a s y lu m ap p lic an 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 t e s h e wa s o rwi l l b e p e r s e c u t e do 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 e ra s y lu m a n dw ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l c la im s . Se e B arr i os v. H older , 58 1 F . 3d 84 9, 85 6 (9th C i r. 20 09 ).08- 74405 3 In her openi ng bri ef

, pet i t i on erfa i l ed t o chal l enge the B IA ’ s deni alof her g e n d e ro rf

a m ilys o c ia l g r o up c la im s , a s w e ll a s h e rc la im f o rC A T r e lie f

. See M a r t i n ez - Se rra n o v . I

NS , 94 F . 3d 1256, 1259- 60 ( 9th C i r . 1996) ( i s s ue s not s p e c if ic a llyr a is e da n da r g u e da r e d e e m e dw a iv e d ) . PETI TI O N FO R R EVI EW D EN I ED .