Court Opinion

ID: 9891714
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-19 16:00:55.768973+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.715963
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       OCT 19 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE GUADALUPE CARDENAS                         No. 21-114
JIMENEZ,                                        Agency No.
                                                A095-778-841
             Petitioner,

 v.                                             MEMORANDUM*

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,

             Respondent.

                     On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                                Immigration Judge

                           Submitted October 10, 2023**

Before:      S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

      Jose Guadalupe Cardenas Jimenez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions

pro se for review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order affirming an asylum

officer’s negative reasonable fear determination. We have jurisdiction under

      *
             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).
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s reasonable fear

determination. Orozco-Lopez v. Garland, 11 F.4th 764, 774 (9th Cir. 2021). We

deny the petition for review.

      As to withholding of removal, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s

determination that Cardenas Jimenez failed to show a reasonable possibility that

the harm he fears would be on account of a protected ground. See Bartolome v.

Sessions, 904 F.3d 803, 814 (9th Cir. 2018) (record did not compel a conclusion

that petitioner established a reasonable fear of persecution where he did not show a

nexus to a protected ground).

      As to protection under the Convention Against Torture, substantial evidence

supports the IJ’s determination that Cardenas Jimenez failed to show a reasonable

possibility of torture by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if

returned to Mexico. See Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 829, 836-37 (9th Cir.

2016) (petitioner failed to demonstrate government acquiescence sufficient to

establish a reasonable possibility of future torture).

      Cardenas Jimenez’s opposed request for judicial administrative closure

(Docket Entry No. 22) is denied.

      The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

                                          2                                  21-114