N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT DANIEL ANTONIO PENATE SALGUER O , Pe titione r, v. ER IC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 09-73012 Age n c y No. A095-139-857 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, 2014 ** B e fore : HAW K INS, M c KEOW N, a nd FR IEDLAND, C irc uit Judge s. Danie l Antonio Pe nat e Sa lgue ro, a native and c i tiz e n of El Sa lva dor, pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ 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 re lie f unde r the C onve ntion Aga inst Torture(“ C AT” ).



# F IL ED DEC 12 2014 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 ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).Our jurisdic tion is governe d by 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for substa ntia l e vide nc e the a ge nc y ’ s fa c tua l findings, Silay a v . Muk ase y , 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th C ir. 2008), a

n d we de ny

in pa rt a nd dismiss in pa

rt the pe tition for re vie w. Eve n if Pe nate Sa lgue ro e sta blishe d a n e xc e ption to e xc use his untime ly a sy lum a pplic ation, substa

ntia l e vide nc e supports the a ge nc y ’ s de te rm ination tha t he fa ile d to e sta

blish pa st pe rse c ution or a fe a r of future pe rse c ution on a c c o unt of a prote c te d ground. Se e Gormle y v . Ashc roft , 364 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th C ir. 2004) (random c rim ina l a c ts bore no ne xus to a prote c te d ground); Ze tino v . Holde r , 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th C ir. 2010) (“ An a lie n ’ s de sire to be fre e from ha ra ssm e nt by c rim ina ls m otiva

te d by the ft or ra

ndom viole nc e by

ga n g m e m be rs be ars no ne xus to a prote c te d

ground.” ); se e also Parussimov a v . Muk a se y , 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th C ir. 2009) (theREAL ID Ac t “ re quire s tha

t a prote c te d ground re pre se nt ‘ one c e ntra l re a s on’ for an a sy lum a pplic ant’ s pe rse c ution” ). W e la c k jurisdic tion to c onside r Pe nate Sa lgue ro’ s c onte ntion ba se d on a pa rtic u la r soc ia l group of his fam ily unit be c a use he fa ile d to ra ise this to the a ge nc y . Se e Barron v . Ashc roft , 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th C ir. 2004). Thus, Pen at e Sa l gue ro’ s a sy lum and withholding of rem o v a l c la im s fa il. Se e Molina-Morale s v . IN S , 237 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th C ir. 2001)

0 9 - 7 3 0 1 2 2Substa ntia l e v i de nc e a lso supports the a ge nc y ’ s de nia l of Pe n at e Sa lgue ro’ s C AT c la i m

be c a use he ha s not shown it is m ore like ly tha n not he will be torture d by the gove rnm e nt of El Sa l va dor or with its c onse nt or a c quie sc e nc e . Se e Silay a , 524 F.3d a

t 1073. W e re

je c t Pe nate Sa lgue ro’ s c onte ntion tha t the a ge nc y ’ s ana ly sis wa s ina de quate an d his c onte ntion tha t the a ge nc y

a pplie d a n inc orre c t sta nda rd. Thus, Pe nate Sa lgue ro’ s C AT c l a im fa ils. PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D in par t; DISM ISSE D in par t.

0 9 - 7 3 0 1 2 3