Omar Funes v. Loretta E. Lynch , 609 F. App'x 468 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             JUL 07 2015
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    OMAR ANTONIO FUNES, AKA Omar                     No. 13-72477
    Hernandez Escalera,
    Agency No. A094-449-640
    Petitioner,
    v.                                              MEMORANDUM*
    LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted June 22, 2015**
    Before:        HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    Omar Antonio Funes, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
    immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
    removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
    *
    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).
    jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
    agency’s factual findings. Silaya v. Mukasey, 
    524 F.3d 1066
    , 1070 (9th Cir. 2008).
    We deny the petition for review.
    Funes does not contend that he suffered past persecution, but claims a fear of
    future persecution and torture.
    Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Funes did not
    establish a well-founded fear of persecution on account of a protected ground. See
    Nagoulko v. INS, 
    333 F.3d 1012
    , 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (possibility of persecution
    was “too speculative”).
    Because Funes failed to meet the lower standard of proof for asylum, his
    claim for withholding of removal necessarily fails. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 
    453 F.3d 1182
    , 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
    Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
    because Funes failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured at
    the instigation of or with the acquiescence of the government if returned to El
    Salvador. See 
    Silaya, 524 F.3d at 1073
    .
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                    13-72477
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-72477

Citation Numbers: 609 F. App'x 468

Judges: Hawkins, Graber, Fletcher

Filed Date: 7/7/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024