Case Name: Amanda F. Rabanales ALVARADO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-11-30
Citations: 359 F. App'x 789
Docket Number: No. 08-73196
Parties: Amanda F. Rabanales ALVARADO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, AND TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 359
Pages: 789–790

Head Matter:
Amanda F. Rabanales ALVARADO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 08-73196.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 17, 2009.
Filed Nov. 30, 2009.
Amanda F. Rabanales Alvarado, Nor-thridge, CA, pro se.
OIL, Russell John Verby, Trial, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, AND TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Amanda F. Rabanales Alvarado, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming the immigration judge's denial of her application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review.
The record does not compel reversal of the IJ's conclusion that petitioner failed to establish that she suffered harm from gang members in Guatemala on account of a protected ground. See Ramos-Lopez v. Holder, 563 F.3d 855, 858-62 (9th Cir.2009) (concluding that resistance to gang activity is not a particular social group for the purpose of establishing nexus to a protected ground); Molina-Morales v. INS, 237 F.3d 1048, 1051-52 (9th Cir.2001) (personal retribution is not persecution on account of a protected ground). Accordingly, petitioner's asylum claim fails.
Contrary to petitioner's allegation, the BIA properly reviewed the IJ's decision. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(5).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.