VARGAS CHAVEZ v. WILKINSON (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-02-25No. No. 16-70090

Summary · law.co

Holding. The petition for review was denied, and the Board of Immigration Appeals' dismissal of the appeal was affirmed because substantial evidence supported the agency's finding that Vargas-Chavez failed to demonstrate it was more likely than not she would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Mexican government.

Lizbett Vargas-Chavez, a Mexican citizen, sought review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' dismissal of her appeal challenging an immigration judge's denial of deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. She argued she faced torture if returned to Mexico, but the agency found insufficient evidence to support her claim. The court examined whether she had demonstrated it was more likely than not that she would be tortured by the Mexican government or with its consent if removed.

The court upheld the agency's decision, finding that substantial evidence supported the denial because Vargas-Chavez failed to prove the required standard for CAT protection. Specifically, she did not establish that torture by or with the knowledge and acquiescence of the Mexican government was the probable outcome of her removal. A temporary stay of removal orders issued previously remained in effect pending issuance of the court's mandate.

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

Key issues

Whether petitioner met the standard for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture
Whether substantial evidence supported the agency's factual findings regarding likelihood of torture
Whether petitioner established the necessary government action or acquiescence element for CAT relief

Procedural posture

Vargas-Chavez petitioned for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge's denial of her CAT deferral application.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

MEMORANDUM **

Lizbett Vargas-Chavez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judges decision denying her application for deferral of removal 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 denial of deferral of removal under CAT because Vargas-Chavez failed to show it is more likely than not she 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); see also Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1033-35 (9th Cir. 2014) (concluding that petitioner did not establish the necessary “state action” for CAT relief).

As stated in the courts April 18, 2016 order, the temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.