N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT M AR IA TOR

RES-DER IC H EY, AKA M aria R ic he y , AKA M aria

De l R osa rio Torre s De R i c he y , AKA M aria R osa rio Torre s-C ue va s, Pe titione r, v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 12-72422 Age n c y No. A077-990-068 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 Ja

n u ary 8, 2016 ** Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia B e fore : WATFORD a

nd FRIEDLAND, C irc uit Judge s, a nd M OTZ, *** Se n ior Distric t Judge . 

# FIL ED JAN 13 2016 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 e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2). *** The Honora

ble J. Fre de ric k

M otz , Se nior Distric t

Judge for the U.S. Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of M ary l an d, sitting by de signa t ion.Pa ge 2 of 4

M aria Torre s-De ric he y , a

native and c itiz e n of M e x ic o, pe titions for re vie w of an orde r of the B oa

rd of Im m igration Appe a l s (B IA) de ny ing he r a pplic ation for a sy lum , withholding of rem ova l, a n d re lie f unde r the C onve ntion Against Torture (C AT). 1. Torre s-De ric h e y

c o nc e de s tha

t he r a sy lum a

pplic ation, whic h

she file d m ore tha n fifte e n y e ars a fte r e nte ring the Unite d State s , wa s untim e ly . 8 U.S.C . § 1158(a )(2)(B ); 8 C . F.R . § 1208.4(a)(2). She m ust the re fore e sta

blish “ c ha nge d” or “ e xtra o rdina

ry ” c irc um sta

n c e s. 8 U.S.C . § 1158(a)(2)(D); 8 C .F.R . § 1208.4(a)(4), (5). She fa ile d to do so. W e have jurisdic tion ove r Torre s-De ric he y ’ s c la i m tha t she e sta blishe d e xtra ordina

ry c irc um sta

nc e s ba se d on he r 2002 a

tte m pt to a d just he r status following her m a

rria ge to a

U.S. c itiz e n. Husy e v

v . Muk ase y , 528 F.3d 1172, 1177–81 (9th C ir. 2008); 8 C . F.R . § 1208.4(a)(5)(iv). Howe v e r, substa ntia l e vide nc e supports the

B IA’ s re j e c tion of tha

t c la i m , give n tha

t she sought a djustm e nt of sta

tus m ore tha

n five y e ars a fte r he r la

w ful sta tus e xpire d a

nd did not a pply for a sy l um

for m o re tha

n e ight y e ars a fte r he r a

pplic at ion for a djustm e nt of sta tus wa s de nie d . S

e e Husy e v , 528 F.3d a

t 1181–82; 8 C . F.R . § 1208.4(a)(5). W e la c k jurisdic tion to c onside r Torre s-De ric he y ’ s a rgum e nt tha

t she e sta blishe d e xtra ordina

ry c irc um sta

nc e s ba se d on these rious illne ss of a n im m e diat e fam ilyPa ge 3 of 4

m e m b e r, se e 8 C .F.R . § 1208.4(a)(5)(vi), a s tha t a rgum e nt wa s ne ithe r pre se nte d to nor re a c he d by

the B IA, se e8 U.S.C . § 1252(d)(1). W e have jurisdic tion ove r Torre s-De ric he y ’ s c la i m tha t she ha s de m onstra

te d c ha nge d c irc um sta

nc e s ba se d

on he r son’ s birth a

nd dia gnosis with disa bilitie s. Se e Ramadan v . Gonzale s , 479 F.3d 646, 648 (9th C ir. 2007) (pe r c uriam ). B ut the re c ord doe s not c o m pe l the c onc lusion tha

t he r a s y l um a pplic ation wa s file d “ within a re a sona ble pe riod give n those ‘ c ha nge d c irc um s ta nc e s ,’ ” give n tha

t Torre s-De ric he y

did not file

he r a pplic ation until m

ore tha n se ve n y e ars a fte r he r son wa s born a nd a pproxim ate ly

four y e ars a fte r he wa s dia g nose d with a dditional disa bilitie s . 8 C .F.R . § 1208.4(a)(4)(ii). W e la c k jurisdic tion to c onside r Torre s-De ric he y ’ s a rgum e nt tha

t he r de la y wa s re a sona

ble be c a use he r son’ s he a lth ha s de te riorate d, a s tha t argum e nt is une xha

u ste d a nd re lie s on dispute d

fa c ts. Se eGaspary an v . Holde r , 707 F.3d 1130, 1134 (9th C ir. 2013). 2. Substa

ntia l e v ide nc e supports the B IA’ s de nia l of Torre s-De ric h e y ’ s c la im for withholding of rem ova l. Eve n if we a ssum e tha t disa ble d c hildre n in M e x ic o a nd the ir pa

re nts c onstitute

a pa rtic u la r soc ia l group within the

m e aning of the Im m igration a

nd Na t iona lity Ac t , the re c ord doe s not c om p e l the c onc l usion that Torre s-De ric he y

would like ly

be pe rse c ute d on a c c ount of he r m e m be rship inPa ge 4 of 4

this group. The re c ord doe s not c om pe l the c onc lusion tha

t Torre s-De ric he y ’ s son will a c c om

p any he r to M e xic o , tha

t he will suffe r tre at

m e nt a m ounting to pe rse c ution if hedoe s, or tha t she will bepe rse c ute d

a s his m othe r. Se eMe ndozaAlv a re z v . Holde r , 714 F.3d 1161, 1165 (9th C i r. 2013) (pe r c uriam ). 3. The B IA prope rly

de nie d Torre s-De ric he y ’ s C AT c la i m . The re c ord doe s not c om pe l the c onc lusion tha

t it is more like ly

tha n not tha t Torre s-De ric he y

will be torture d by , at t

he be he st of, or with the

a c quie sc e nc e of a

M e xic an offic ia l if she is re m ove d. Se e 8 C . F.R . §§ 1208.16(c ), 1208.18(a). PE T IT IO N DE NIE D in par t and DISM ISSE D in par t.