Court Opinion

ID: 4879690
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-08-27 20:04:13.035181+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:12:42.455129
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       AUG 27 2021
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALEXANDER ANTONIO CAMPOS-                       No.    20-71222
DUARTE,
                                                Agency No. A200-939-266
                Petitioner,

 v.                                             MEMORANDUM*

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,

                Respondent.

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

                              Submitted August 17, 2021**

Before:      SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

      Alexander Antonio Campos-Duarte, a native and citizen of El Salvador,

petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order

dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his

application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against

      *
             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).
Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for

substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, including determinations

regarding social distinction. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241-42 (9th

Cir. 2020). 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. Id. We deny the petition

for review.

      Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Campos-

Duarte failed to establish that his proposed social group is socially distinct. See id.

at 1243 (substantial evidence supported the agency’s determination that

petitioner’s proposed social group was not cognizable because of the absence of

society-specific evidence of social distinction). Therefore, the BIA did not err in

concluding that Campos-Duarte 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))). Thus, Campos-Duarte’s withholding of removal claim fails.

      Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because

                                           2                                    20-71222
Campos-Duarte 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

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                                   20-71222