NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SERGIO BRAVO

- FLORES,

Petitioner,

v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 15

- 72979 Agency No. A201

- 184

- 715

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 13, 2018 **
Before: LEAVY , M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Sergio Bravo

- Flores, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigra tion Appeals’ order dismiss ing h is appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for relief and ordering removal

. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is n ot precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAR 20 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 15

- 72979

evidence the agency’s factual determinations, and we review de novo questions of law

. Mohammed v. Gonzales , 400 F.3d 785, 791

- 92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review. The agency did not err in finding Bravo

- Flores ineligible for cancellation of removal, where he admitted to having a firearms

- related conviction

. See 8 U.S.C. § § 1229b(b)(1)(C ) , 1227(a)(2)(c) ; 8 C.F.R. § 1240.8(d); Rendon v. Mukasey , 520 F.3d 967, 973 (9th Cir. 2008) ( where “the evidence indicates that one or more of the grounds for mandatory denial of the application for relief may apply, the alien shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that such grounds do not apply” )

. Bravo

- Flores has not challenged the agency’s denial of asylum as untimely filed. See Corro

- Barragan v. Holder , 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver)

. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of withholding of removal , where Bravo

- Flores failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be persecuted on account of a protected ground in M exico. See Delgado

- Ortiz v. Holder , 600 F.3d 1148, 115 1

- 5 2 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant must generally s how an individualized, rather than a generalized, risk of persecution to establish eligibil ity for asylum or withhold ing; “returning Mexicans from the United States” is too broad to qualify as a cognizable social group). We are not persuaded by3 15

- 72979

Bravo

- Flores ’s contention that “returning Mexican [ s ] from the United States with
U [

. ] S [

. ] born children that are less than fluen t in Spanish” is more particular than the social group which we rejected in Delgado

- Ortiz

. See i d . at 1152 ( contention that members of the proposed social group may be “easily identified” does not address the breadth of the proposed group). Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) , where Bravo

- Flores failed to show it was more likely than not that a government official in Mexico would torture him or

conse nt or acquiesce to h is torture. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2) ; Delgado

- Ortiz , 600 F.3d at 1152

. The record does not support Bravo

- Flores ’s contentions that the agency ignore d his evidence or arguments , f ail ed to cons ider his eligibility for relief, or fail ed to explain its reasoning. See Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 2010) (the agency must consider the issues raised and express its decision “in terms sufficient to enable a reviewing court to perceive that it has heard and thought and not me rely reacted” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted))

. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.