Court Opinion

ID: 6325767
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-03-22 20:00:39.387059+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:05.738017
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MAR 22 2022
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FERNANDO WILVER VALLE                           No.    16-73294
RODRIGUEZ,
                                                Agency No. A200-694-628
                Petitioner,

 v.                                             MEMORANDUM*

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,

                Respondent.

                     On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                         Board of Immigration Appeals

                              Submitted March 16, 2022**

Before:      SILVERMAN, MILLER, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.

      Fernando Wilver Valle Rodriguez, a native and citizen of El Salvador,

petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his

appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for

withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo the legal question

of whether a particular social group is cognizable, except to the extent that

deference is owed to the BIA’s interpretation of the governing statutes and

regulations. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241-42 (9th Cir. 2020). We

review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Id. at 1241. We

deny the petition for review.

      The agency did not err in concluding that Valle Rodriguez failed to establish

membership in a cognizable particular social group. See Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d

1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular

social group, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of

members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with

particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting

Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))); see also Santos-

Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008) (proposed group of

“young men in El Salvador resisting gang violence” lacked particularity),

abrogated on other grounds by Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir.

2013) (en banc). Thus, Valle Rodriguez’s withholding of removal claim fails.

      Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Valle

Rodriguez failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the

consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to El Salvador. See Garcia-

                                           2                                    16-73294
Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1033-35 (9th Cir. 2014) (petitioner did not

establish the necessary “state action” for CAT relief).

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

                                          3                          16-73294