Case Name: Carlos Humberto Mendez VASQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-11-25
Citations: 585 F. App'x 680
Docket Number: No. 10-73589
Parties: Carlos Humberto Mendez VASQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 585
Pages: 680–681

Head Matter:
Carlos Humberto Mendez VASQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 10-73589.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 18, 2014.
Filed Nov. 25, 2014.
Claudia Jasmine Lopez, Esquire, Law Offices of Mendez & Lopez, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Oil, Nancy Ellen Friedman, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, 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
Carlos Humberto Mendez Vasquez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir.2006), and we review de novo due process claims, Liu v. Holder, 640 F.3d 918, 930 (9th Cir.2011). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.
Substantial evidence supports the agency's denial of CAT relief because Vasquez failed to establish that it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the acquiescence of the government of Guatemala. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir.2008).
We reject Vasquez's due process contention. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000) (petitioner must show error to establish a due process violation).
In denying Vasquez's asylum and withholding of removal claims, the agency found Vasquez failed to establish a fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground. When the IJ and BIA issued their decisions in this case they did not have the benefit of this court's decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir.2013) (en banc), Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir.2013), and Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir.2014), or the BIA's decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Thus, we remand Vasquez's asylum and withholding of removal claims to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam).
Each party shall bear their own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part; REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.