Court Opinion

ID: 4506253
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-02-10 22:00:26.759975+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:53:02.990473
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FEB 10 2020
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JUAN PEDRO CHAVIRIN-MARTINEZ,                    No.   18-73037

                Petitioner,                      Agency No. A090-939-063

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

                Respondent.

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

                              Submitted February 4, 2020**

Before:      FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

      Juan Pedro Chavirin-Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions 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 Torture (“CAT”). We have

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v.

      *
             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).
Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except to the extent that deference

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

Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for

review.

      The BIA did not err in finding that Chavirin-Martinez 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))). Thus, Chavirin-

Martinez’s withholding of removal claim fails.

      Chavirin-Martinez’s contention that the agency failed to give proper weight

to his evidence, including witness testimony, is unsupported by the record.

       The BIA did not err in finding that Chavirin-Martinez waived the issue of

relief under CAT. See Segura v. Holder, 605 F.3d 1063, 1066 (9th Cir. 2010)

(broad statements in the notice of appeal and brief were insufficient to put the BIA

on notice of petitioner’s claim).

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

                                           2