Remberto Zecena v. Eric H. Holder Jr. ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 22 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
REMBERTO HERNANDEZ ZECENA, No. 08-72857
Petitioner, Agency No. A073-403-628
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Remberto Hernandez Zecena, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals” (“BIA”) order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum.
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
evidence, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we
deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that the
presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution was rebutted by evidence
of changed country conditions. See Kumar v. INS, 204 F.3d 931, 934 (9th Cir.
2000); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)(i)(A). We reject Zecena’s contention that
the agency’s analysis was not sufficiently individualized. See Gonzalez-
Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 999-1000 (9th Cir. 2003) (“it is entirely
appropriate for the BIA” to use its expertise in considering country reports and
deciding which portions are relevant to applicant).
The court lacks jurisdiction to review Zecena’s contention that he qualifies
for humanitarian asylum because he failed to exhaust this claim before the agency.
See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 08-72857