N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
DANYLO A. M O SKALYUK, AKA Dany l o M oska ly

uk, AKA Da

ny lo Andre y avic h M oska l y

uk, AKA Da

ny lo Andriy ovy c h M oska ly

uk, Pe t i tione r,
v. M ATTHEW

G. W H ITAKER , Ac t ing Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R e sponde nt. No. 15-72543 Age n c y No. A057-189-518
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 De c e m

be r 5, 2018 ** Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia 

# F IL ED DEC 07 2018 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, 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 Ninth C irc uit R

ule 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 e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).B e fore : O’ SC A N NLAIN a nd IKUTA, C irc uit Judge s, a nd STEEH, *** Distric t Judge
. Dany lo M oska ly

uk pe t itions for re vie wof a n orde r of the B oa

rd of Im m i gration Appe a l s (B IA) a ffirm ing the de c ision of a n Im m i gration Judge(IJ) de ny ing his c la im s for a sy lum , withholding of re m ova l, a nd prote c tion unde r the C onve ntion Against Torture(C AT). W e hav e jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. M oska l y uk did not e sta

blish tha t a ny fe are d future ha

rm would be fa ll him

on
a c c ount of his me m

be rship in his propose d soc ia l group, disa ble d pe rsons with spina l c ord injurie s in Ukra ine , be c a use those fe are d

ha rm s a pply to m a ny othe r groups, a nd the re is no e vide nc e tha t the propose d soc ia l group is inte ntiona lly ta rge te d in Ukra ine
. Se e Me ndoza-Alvare z v . Holde r , 714 F.3d 1161, 1165 (9th C ir. 2013). The re fore , e ve n a ssum ing, a s the B IA did, tha t the propose d soc ia l group is c ogniz a

b le , the B IA’ s de c i sion tha t M oska ly uk fa ile d to e sta

blish a ne xus be twe e n a ny fe are d pe rse c ution a

nd his m e m

b e rship in his propose d soc i a l group
wa s supporte d

by substa ntia l e vide nc e . Se e Parussimov a v . Muk ase y , 555 F.3d 734, 739–41 (9th C ir. 2009). Nor did M oska ly uk e sta b lish a n obje c tive ly
re a s ona ble fe ar of future pe rse c ution, be c a u se he fa ile d to e sta

blish tha t he ha d a ny individualiz e d

risk of be i ng single d out for pe rse c ution on the ba sis of his

* * * The Honora

ble Ge orge C aram

Ste e h III, Unite d State s Distric t Judge for the Ea ste rn Distric t of M ic higa n, sitting by

de signa tion. 2m e m

b e rship in the

propose d soc ia l group, se e Halim v . Holde r , 590 F.3d 971, 979 (9th C ir. 2009), or tha

t the re e x ists a

patte rn or pra c tic e of pe rse c ution of sim ila rly situa te d pe rsons in Ukra ine ba se d on the ir m e m be rship in thepropose d soc i a l group, se e W

a k k ary v . Holde r , 558 F.3d 1049, 1060–62 (9th C ir. 2009). B e c a use M oska ly uk fa ile d to e sta

blish a we ll-founde d fe ar of future pe rse c ution on a c c ount of his m e m

be rship in thepropose d soc ia l group, his c la im for a sy lum m ust fa il. Se e 8 C .F.R . § 1208.13(b)(2)(i)(A). And, be c a use the “ c le ar proba

bility sta nda rd for withholding of rem ova l is m ore stringe nt tha n the we ll-founde d fe ar sta nda rd gove rning a sy l um ,” A l-Harbi v . IN S , 242 F.3d 882, 888–89 (9th C ir. 2001) (inte rna l c ita

tions a nd quota tion m a rks om itte d), M oska ly

uk’ s withholding of
re m ova l c la im

ne c e ssa rily fa ils. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e a lso supports the B IA’ s de nia l of M o ska ly uk’ s C AT
c la im be c a use the re is no e v ide nc e tha t the Ukra inia

n gove rnm e nt, or individua ls
a c ting with gove

rnm e nt a c quie s c e nc e , will m ore like ly tha n not ha rm M oska ly uk with thespe c ific inte nt to inflic t se ve re pa i n or suffe ring. Se e Ville gas v . Muk

ase y , 523 F.3d 984, 989 (9th C ir. 2008). PE T IT IO N DE NIE D.

3