Case Name: Rene RODRIGUEZ-VALENZUELA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-06
Citations: 328 F. App'x 511
Docket Number: No. 07-74672
Parties: Rene RODRIGUEZ-VALENZUELA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 511–512

Head Matter:
Rene RODRIGUEZ-VALENZUELA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-74672.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 16, 2009.
Filed July 6, 2009.
Carlos Alfredo Cruz, Esquire, Law Offices of Carlos A. Cruz, Alhambra, CA, for Petitioner.
District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Marion E. Guyton, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Le-fevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Rene Rodriguez-Valenzuela, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order affirming an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for substantial evidence, Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir.2008), we deny the petition for review.
Valenzuela testified to four incidents with the Mara Salvatrucha gang in which they demanded money, beat him one time, and threatened him with future harm. Substantial evidence supports the BIA's denial of asylum because Valenzuela failed to establish past persecution or fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground. See id. at 746-47 (no evidence that petitioner's opposition to gang's criminal activity was based on political opinion); see also Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir.2009) (a protected ground must be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.