Jorge Luna-Bautista v. Loretta E. Lynch ( 2016 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 24 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JORGE ANTONIO LUNA-BAUTISTA, No. 14-73249
AKA Jorge Antonio Bautista,
Agency No. A076-606-354
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 16, 2016**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Jorge Antonio Luna-Bautista, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 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),
and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Luna-Bautista
failed to establish a fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground.
See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740-41 (9th Cir. 2008) (under the
REAL ID Act, an applicant must prove a protected ground is at least “one central
reason” for persecution). Thus, Luna-Bautista’s withholding of removal claim
fails. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1015-16 (9th Cir. 2010).
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of Luna-Bautista’s CAT
claim because he failed to demonstrate it is more likely than not he would be
tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official in Mexico. See
Silaya, 524 F.3d at 1073.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 14-73249