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 pa ne 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 CARL OS PE RE Z, 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. 11- 73202 A ge nc yN o. A 070- 774- 287 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 a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M ay14, 2013 ** B efo re: L E A V Y , T H O M A S , an dM U R G U IA , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C a r l os P e r e z , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of P e ru, pe t i t i ons pr o s e f

orr e vi e w 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 hi s app ea l fr om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng hi s appl i c a t i ons f ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng, a n dr e lie f

u n d e rth e C o n v e n tio n A g a in s t T o rtu r e ( “C A T ” ) . O u rju r is d ic tio n is 

# FI LED MA Y20 2 013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 73202 2 g o v e rn e db y8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w f o rs ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e f a c tu a l f in d in g s . W akkaryv. H

older , 558 F . 3d 1049, 1056 ( 9th C i r . 2009) . W e de nyi n parta nd d i s m i s s i n p a rtth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. S ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e s up p o rts th e a g e n c y ’s f in d in g th a t P e r e z f

a ile dto e s tab lis h h a rm r is in g to th e le v e l o f p a s t p e r s e c u tio n . Se e Na g o u lko v . I NS , 333 F . 3d 1012, 1015 ( 9th C i r . 2003) ( no pa s tpe r s e c ut i on w he r e pe t i t i one rw a s not harm ed). S ub st ant i alevi dence al so supp ort s the agency’ s f i nd i ng thatP er ez fa i l ed to e s tab lis h aw e ll- f

o u n d e df e a ro f f u tu r e p e r s e c u tio n in P e ru . Se e D uar te de G u i n a c v . I

NS , 17 9 F . 3d 11 56 , 11 59 (9th C i r. 19 99 ) ( al i en m ustaddu ce “ cr edi bl e, d ir e c t, an ds p e c if

ic e v id e n c e in th e r e c o r do f f a c ts th a t w o u lds up p o rt ar e a s o n ab le fear o f p ersecu t i o n ”). A cco rd i n g l y, P erez’s asylu m cl ai m fai l s. B e c au s e P e titio n e rf

a ile dto e s tab lis h e lig ib ilityf o ra s y lu m , h e n e c e s s ar ily f a ile dto m e e t th e m o r e s tr in g e n t s tan d ar df o rw ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l. See Zehat

ye v. G on zales , 45 3 F . 3d 11 82 , 11 90 (9th C i r. 20 06 ). S ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e a l s o s upport s the a ge nc y ’ s de ni a l of C A T pr ot e c t i on be c aus e P e r e z f

a i l e d t o de m ons tr a t e i ti s m or e l i ke l ythan nothe w i l l be t ortur e d by 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 th e P e ru v ian g o v e rn m e n t. See Si laya v. Mukasey , 52 4 F . 3d 10 66 , 10 73 (9th C i r. 20 08 ).11- 73202 3 F i na l l y , w e l a c k j ur i s di c t i on t o a ddr e s s P e r e z ’ s r e que s ttha tw e r e m and the case fo r co n si d erat i o n o f P erez’s el i g i b i l i ty fo r can cel l at i o n o f rem o v al , b ecau se P e r e z d idn o t e x h au s t th e is s u e b e f o r e th e B I A . Se e B a rr o n v . A s h c r o ft , 358 F . 3d 67 4, 67 8 (9th C i r. 20 04 ). P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D E N IE D i n p art; D IS M IS S E D i n p art.