Court Opinion

ID: 9364194
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-18 18:00:43.222454+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:36.605349
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JAN 18 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DIONISIA SACOR-GARCIA,                           No.   17-73226

                Petitioner,                      Agency No. A208-377-752

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,

                Respondent.

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

                              Submitted January 13, 2023**
                                 Pasadena, California

Before: CALLAHAN, R. NELSON, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

      Dionisia Sacor-Garcia petitions for review of an order of the Board of

Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming an immigration judge’s denial of her

applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Immigration

      *
             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).
and Nationality Act and the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.

      1.     To qualify for asylum and withholding of removal, Sacor-Garcia must

have shown that her husband is a person whom “the government is unable or

unwilling to control.” Ornelas-Chavez v. Gonzales, 458 F.3d 1052, 1056 (9th Cir.

2006) (quoting Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d 1482, 1487 (9th Cir. 1997)). By failing to

challenge the BIA’s holding that she did not show that the Guatemalan government

was unable or unwilling to control her husband, Sacor-Garcia has forfeited any

such argument. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079–80 (9th Cir.

2013). Because this issue is dispositive of Sacor-Garcia’s asylum and withholding

claims, we do not consider any arguments related to Sacor-Garcia’s proposed

social group.

      2.     Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Sacor-Garcia

does not qualify for CAT relief. Sacor-Garcia points to a State Department report

discussing sexual harassment and discrimination against women in Guatemala. But

generalized evidence of violence and crime in a country is insufficient to prove that

a specific individual faces a likelihood of mistreatment rising to the level of

torture. See Lalayan v. Garland, 4 F.4th 822, 840 (9th Cir. 2021) (submitted

country reports were insufficient to establish eligibility for CAT relief because they

did not indicate any particularized risk of torture).

                                           2
PETITION DENIED.

                   3