Case Name: Angel Guido PAUCARIMA-CERON, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-21
Citations: 225 F. App'x 633
Docket Number: No. 05-76774
Parties: Angel Guido PAUCARIMA-CERON, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 225
Pages: 633–634

Head Matter:
Angel Guido PAUCARIMA-CERON, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-76774.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 12, 2007 .
Filed March 21, 2007.
Gloria Lopez, Law Office of Gloria Lopez, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Wendy J. Miller, Esq., U.S. Dept, of Justice, Environment & Natural Resources Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: KOZINSKI, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Angel Guido Paucarima-Ceron, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order affirming the Immigration Judge's ("IJ") order denying his application for withholding of removal. As the BIA adopted the IJ's decision, we review the IJ's decision as if it were that of the BIA, under the substantial evidence standard. See Hoque v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1190, 1194 (9th Cir.2004); see also Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ's determination that any mistreatment Pau-carima-Ceron suffered was not on account of a protected ground. The facts in evidence do not compel the conclusion that Paucarima-Ceron was targeted by Shining Path guerrillas on account of an imputed political opinion. See INS v. Elias-Zaca-rias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); see also Tecun-Florian v. INS, 207 F.3d 1107, 1109-10 (9th Cir. 2000).
PETITION DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.