Case Name: Erick Ernesto AMAYA-SANCHEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-03-29
Citations: 425 F. App'x 595
Docket Number: No. 10-71813
Parties: Erick Ernesto AMAYA-SANCHEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 425
Pages: 595–596

Head Matter:
Erick Ernesto AMAYA-SANCHEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 10-71813.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2010.
Filed March 29, 2011.
Alexander H. Lubarsky, Esquire, San Mateo, CA, for Petitioner.
Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Theo Nickerson, Esquire, Ada Elsie Bosque, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, 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
Erick Ernesto Amaya-Sanchez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying his applications for asylum and withholding of removal.
Amaya-Sanchez contends that he was persecuted by gangs based on his political opinion as evidenced by his expressed opposition to gangs and his resistance to gang recruitment. Substantial evidence supports the BIA's determination that Amaya-Sanchez failed to establish that any harm he suffered, or fears, from gangs is on account of a protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 482-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (forced recruitment by persecutors seeking to fill their ranks is not necessarily persecution on account of political opinion); Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 855-56 (9th Cir.2009) (petitioner who resisted gang recruitment did not establish persecution on account of social group or political opinion); Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 747 (9th Cir.2008).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.