Case Name: Roberto Escobar ALVARENGA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-12-12
Citations: 210 F. App'x 726
Docket Number: No. 05-71425
Parties: Roberto Escobar ALVARENGA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, RYMER and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 210
Pages: 726–727

Head Matter:
Roberto Escobar ALVARENGA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-71425.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 4, 2006.
Filed Dec. 12, 2006.
Frank P. Sprouls, Esq., Law Office of Ricci and Sprouls, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Rhonda M. Dent, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights/Disability Rights Section, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: GOODWIN, RYMER and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suit able for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Roberto Escobar Alvarenga, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") decision dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge's ("IJ") denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence and will uphold the BIA's and IJ's decisions unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA's and IJ's conclusion that Escobar Alvarenga did not establish eligibility for asylum. The record indicates that the two threats guerillas made against Escobar Alvarenga were attempts at recruitment, and not motivated by his political opinion or on account of another protected ground. See id. at 482-83, 112 S.Ct. 812. His asylum claim therefore fails.
Because Escobar Alvarenga failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 960-61 (9th Cir.1996) (en banc).
PETITION FOR REVIEW 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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.