LOPEZ NEPOMUCENO v. GARLAND (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-05-26No. No. 19-71143

Summary · law.co

Holding. The petition for review is denied, and the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing the appeal is affirmed.

Rodrigo Lopez-Nepomuceno, a Mexican national, sought review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' dismissal of his appeal challenging an immigration judge's denial of withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture. The court examined whether substantial evidence supported the agency's factual findings that Lopez-Nepomuceno failed to qualify for either form of relief.

On the withholding of removal claim, the agency determined that Lopez-Nepomuceno did not establish that his alleged harm was connected to a protected ground—such as political opinion, membership in a particular social group, religion, race, or nationality—as required by law. Instead, the court found his experiences appeared to stem from criminal activity motivated by theft or gang-related violence, which lack the necessary nexus to protected grounds. Additionally, the agency found he failed to show a clear probability of future persecution.

Regarding Convention Against Torture relief, the agency concluded Lopez-Nepomuceno did not demonstrate it was more likely than not that he would face torture by or with the involvement of the Mexican government if returned. The court found no error in the agency's analysis and upheld the denial of both forms of relief.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Whether harm was inflicted on account of a protected ground under withholding of removal law
Whether there exists a clear probability of future persecution
Whether the applicant faces a likelihood of torture by or with government acquiescence under CAT

Procedural posture

The petitioner sought judicial review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' affirmance of an immigration judge's denial of withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture relief.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

MEMORANDUM **

Rodrigo Lopez-Nepomuceno, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judges 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 for substantial evidence the agencys factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agencys determination that Lopez-Nepomuceno failed to establish the harm he experienced was on account of a protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicants “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Substantial evidence also supports the agencys determination that Lopez-Nepomuceno failed to establish a clear probability of future persecution. See Tamang v. Holder, 598 F.3d 1083, 1094 (9th Cir. 2010) (no clear probability of persecution where similarly situated family members were threatened but not otherwise harmed). Thus, Lopez-Nepomucenos withholding of removal claim fails.

Substantial evidence supports the agencys denial of CAT relief because Lopez-Nepomuceno 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 Mexico. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

We reject as unsupported by the record Lopez-Nepomucenos contentions that the agency erred in its analysis of his claims.

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

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.