Court Opinion

ID: 6496979
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-06-30 20:00:28.983686+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:19.278450
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JUN 30 2022
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LUIS ENRIQUE RAMIREZ                            No.    20-70489
BETANCURD,
                                                Agency No. A202-083-120
                Petitioner,

 v.                                             MEMORANDUM*

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,

                Respondent.

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

                               Submitted June 1, 2022**

Before:      FRIEDLAND, SANCHEZ, and H. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

      Luis Enrique Ramirez Betancurd, a native and citizen of Guatemala,

petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing

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

      *
             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).
asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against

Torture (“CAT”).

      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 Ramirez Betancurd did not

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 Barrios v.

Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-55 (9th Cir. 2009) (concluding that young Guatemalan

men who resist gang recruitment did not constitute a particular social group),

abrogated in part on other grounds by Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081,

1093 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc). Thus, Ramirez Betancurd’s asylum and

withholding of removal claims fail.

                                           2                                      20-70489
      Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection

because Ramirez Betancurd 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

Guatemala. Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

      The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the

mandate.

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

                                         3                                   20-70489