Case Name: Jorge Santos PEREZ; et al., Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-01-21
Citations: 363 F. App'x 444
Docket Number: No. 07-72863
Parties: Jorge Santos PEREZ; et al., Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 363
Pages: 444–445

Head Matter:
Jorge Santos PEREZ; et al., Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-72863.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 11, 2010.
Filed Jan. 21, 2010.
Jorge Ivan Rodriguez-Choi, Esquire, Law Offices of Jorge Rodriguez-Choi, Oakland, CA, for Petitioners.
Monica Antoun, Esquire, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jorge Santos Perez and his son, both natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for substantial evidence, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), we deny the petition for review.
Perez contends that he will be persecuted by either the guerillas or the military if he returns to Guatemala. Substantial evidence supports the agency's finding that Perez failed to establish that a reasonable person in his circumstances would fear persecution upon return to Guatemala. See Li v. INS, 92 F.3d 985, 987 (9th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, Perez's asylum claim fails.
Perez does not does challenge the denial of his withholding of removal claim. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (issues not supported by argument are deemed waived).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.