Case Name: Fausto Renato QUEVEDO, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-11-16
Citations: 702 F. App'x 613
Docket Number: No. 16-70507
Parties: Fausto Renato QUEVEDO, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: KOZINSKI, HAWKINS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 702
Pages: 613–614

Head Matter:
Fausto Renato QUEVEDO, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 16-70507
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted November 14, 2017 Pasadena, California
Filed November 16, 2017
Shan Potts, Attorney, Law Offices of Shan Potts, Glendale, CA, for Petitioner
Nancy Canter, Michael Christopher Heyse, Trial Attorneys, OIL, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent
Before: KOZINSKI, HAWKINS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Honorable Barrington D. Parker, Jr., United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
To qualify for Convention Against Torture relief a petitioner must show that "it is more likely than not that he . would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal," 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2). The IJ didn't err by finding that Quevedo failed to meet this standard. Substantial evidence supported the IJ's determination that the beating Quevedo suffered wasn't torture. See Ahmed v. Keisler, 504 F.3d 1183, 1201 (9th Cir. 2007). His later peaceful interaction with Guatemalan police further demonstrates that he's unlikely to be tortured if returned to Guatemala.
DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.