Case Name: Erick Noe ALEMAN-CABRERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-03-28
Citations: 424 F. App'x 682
Docket Number: No. 09-72234
Parties: Erick Noe ALEMAN-CABRERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: FARRIS, LEAVY and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 424
Pages: 682–683

Head Matter:
Erick Noe ALEMAN-CABRERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 09-72234.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2011.
Filed March 28, 2011.
Erick Noe Aleman-Cabera, Escondido, CA, pro se.
Rachel Louise Browning, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, 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 Noe Aleman-Cabrera, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the Board's denial of asylum and withholding of removal because Aleman-Cabrera failed to show his alleged persecutors threatened him on account of a protected ground. His fear of future persecution based on an actual or imputed anti-gang or anti-crime opinion is not on account of the protected ground of either membership in a particular social group or political opinion. Ramos Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-56 (9th Cir.2009); Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir.2008); see Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 865 (9th Cir.2001) ("Asylum generally is not available to victims of civil strife, unless they are singled out on account of a protected ground.")
Substantial evidence also supports the Board's denial of CAT relief based on the Board's finding that Aleman-Cabrera did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran government. See Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir.2007).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.