NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HENRY OBED DIAZ

- GAMEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 23

- 1066 Agency No. A204

- 903

- 759

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 9, 2024 ** Phoenix

, Arizona

Before: RAWLINSON and COLLINS, Circuit Judges, and FITZWATER, District Judge

. ***

Henry Obed Diaz

- Gamez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for

review of the BIA’s dismissal of his appeal of the denial of his application for

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater

, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas , sitting by designation. 

# FILED

SEP 24 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 23

- 1066

withholding of removal and his request for voluntary departure. We review t he

BIA’s legal conclusions, “such as whether a proposed particular social group is

cognizable, de novo ,” and “factual findings for substantial evidence.” Nguyen v.

Barr , 983 F.3d 1099, 1101 (9th Cir. 2020) (citation s omitted)

.

1. The BIA did not err in upholding the decision from the Immigration

Judge (IJ) denying withholding of removal

. The BIA did not rely on vacated

decisions such as Matter of L

- E

- A

- II , 27 I&N Dec. 581 (A.G. 2019) , or Matter of

A

- B

- II , 27 I&N Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018) , in rejecting Diaz

- Gamez’s proposed social

groups.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Diaz

- Gamez failed to

establish a nexus between his proposed particular social group (PSG) of “family

members o f individuals targeted and killed by criminal organizations in Mexico”

and any potential future persecution

. As the BIA observed, Diaz

- Gamez did not

establish “why his cousin was killed, who killed him, or the circumstances thereof”

or that the same criminals have targeted similarly situated family members.

Therefore, substantial evidence s upports the determination that Diaz

- Gamez’s

relationship to his cousin would not be “a reason” that he would be harmed

.
Barajas

- Romero v. Lynch , 846 F.3d 351, 359 (9th Cir. 2017) ; see also Zetino v.

Holder , 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (explaining that a fear of random3 23

- 1066

crime does not establish fear of persecution on a protected ground). 1

2. We do not have jurisdiction to review the discretionary denial of

voluntary departure. See R ojas v. Holder , 704 F.3d 792, 794 (9th Cir. 2012).

“However, we retain power to review constitutional claims or questions of law

raised upon a petition for review.” Id. (citation and internal quotation marks

omitted). Because Diaz

- Gamez does not raise a constitutional challenge or

question of law, we dismiss the petition as to this claim. See id. ; see also 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252(a)(2)(B), (D)

.

PETITION DISMISSED in part and DENIED in part.

1 We do not reach the issue of whether Diaz

- Gamez’s proposed PSG is cognizable because the BIA did not reject Diaz

- Gamez’s application on that ground. See INS v. Bagamasbad , 429 U.S. 24, 25

- 26 (1976) (per curiam) (“As a general rule courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach.

. . . ”) (citations omitted). Nor do we reach Diaz

- Gamez’s arguments based on his other proposed PSG of “Americanized Mexicans” because he conceded in his brief that it “may be overly broad to constitute a PSG by itself.”