MEMORANDUM **
Gloria Juarez-Hernandez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judges decision denying her application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. 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 BIAs interpretation of the governing statutes and regulations. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241-42 (9th Cir. 2020). We review for substantial evidence the agencys factual findings. Id. at 1241. We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not err in concluding that Juarez-Hernandez 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))). We reject as unsupported by the record Juarez-Hernandezs contentions that the agency erred in its analysis of her withholding of removal claim. Thus, Juarez-Hernandezs withholding of removal claim fails.
In light of this disposition, we need not reach Juarez-Hernandezs contentions regarding the agencys adverse credibility finding. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required to decide issues unnecessary to the results they reach).
On August 1, 2019, the court granted a stay of removal. The stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.