Case Name: Eugenio FERNANDEZ-PEREZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-05-19
Citations: 181 F. App'x 656
Docket Number: No. 04-70212
Parties: Eugenio FERNANDEZ-PEREZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 181
Pages: 656–657

Head Matter:
Eugenio FERNANDEZ-PEREZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 04-70212.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted May 9, 2006.
Decided May 19, 2006.
Xavier Rosas, Law Offices of Enrique Arevalo, South Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner.
CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, James A. Hunolt, Esq., Carol Federighi, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Petitioner Eugenio Fernandez-Perez petitions for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") insofar as it denied his request for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). He does not ask us to review the portions of the order that denied his applications for asylum and withholding of removal on the basis of his conviction of conspiracy to possess cocaine for distribution.
The BIA did not err in holding that Petitioner failed to prove entitlement to CAT relief. Petitioner has been away from Cuba for about 40 years and has had no significant involvement in anti-Castro activities for more than a decade. In the circumstances, a different result is not compelled. Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir.2003).
PETITION DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.