N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT B ANI JAHAXIEL M ENDEZ-R OSALES, Pe titione r, v. ERIC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 10-72330 Age n c y No. A099-581-149 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

Nove m b e r 19, 2013 ** B e fore : C ANB Y, TR OTT, a nd THOM AS, C irc uit Judge s. B ani Ja haxie l M e nde z -R osa le s , a native and c itiz e n of Gua te m a la , pe titions for re vie w of the B o a

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 de c ision de ny ing his a pplic at ion for a sy lum , withholding of rem o v a l, a nd prote c tion under the C onve ntion Against Torture



# FIL ED D EC 10 2013 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).(“ 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 a nd re vie wde novo dueproc e ss c l a im s. Ze tino v . Holde r , 622 F.3d 1007, 1011-12 (9th C ir. 2010). W e de ny the pe tition for re vie w. The re c ord doe s not c om

pe l the c onc lusion tha

t M e nde z -R osa le s file d his a sy lum a pplic ation within a

re a sona ble pe riod of tim e a fte r a

ny e x tra ordina

ry c irc um s ta nc e s . Se e8 C .F.R . § 1208.4(a)(5); Husy e v v . Muk a se y , 528 F.3d 1172, 1181-82 (9th C ir. 2008). Ac c ordingly , we de ny the pe t ition a s to his a sy lum c la im . M e nde z -R osa le s te s tifie d ga ng m e m be rs in Gua

te m a la c o nfronte d a

nd robbe d him m ultipletim e s, a

nd be c a use he ha s live d in theUnite d Stat e s, the y would think he

ha s m one y

and would try

to ha rm him if he re t urne d . Substa

ntia l e vide nc e supports the

a ge nc y ’ s de te rm ination tha t M e nde z -R osa le s fa i le d to e sta blish pa st pe rse c ution or a like lihood of future pe rse c ution on a c c ount of a prote c te d ground. Se e Ze tino , 622 F.3d a t 1016 (“An a lie n’ s de sire to be fre e from ha ra ssm e nt by

c rim i na l s m otiva

te d by the ft or ra

ndom viole nc e by

ga ng m e m be rs be ars no ne xus to a

prote c te d ground.” ). Ac c ordingly , M e nde z -R osa le s’ s withholding of rem o v a l c la im fa ils. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e a lso supports the a ge nc y ’ s de nia l of M e n de z -R o sa le s’ s C AT c la i m

be c a use he fa ile d to e sta

b lish it is m

ore like ly tha n not he would be

1 0 - 7 2 3 3 0 2torture d if re turne d to Gua te m a la . Se eSilay a v . Muk ase y , 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th C ir. 2008). Fina lly , we re

je c t M e nde z -R osa le s’ s c onte ntion tha t dismissa l of his a

ppe a l by a singlem e m

b e r of the B IA viola

te d due proc e ss. S

e eFalc on C

a rric hev . Ashc roft , 350 F.3d 845, 851 (9th C ir. 2003); se e also Lata v . IN S, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th C ir. 2000) (re quiring e rror and pre judic e to pre va il on a

due proc e ss c la im). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

1 0 - 7 2 3 3 0 3