Ruben Esau Romero-Calderon v. U.S. Attorney General

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-14512 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Non-Argument Calendar JUNE 1, 2011
________________________ JOHN LEY
CLERK
Agency No. A095-098-977
RUBEN ESAU ROMERO-CALDERON,
Petitioner,
versus
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
________________________
Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
________________________
(June 1, 2011)
Before BARKETT, WILSON and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Ruben Esau Romero-Calderon, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions
this Court for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”)
affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for withholding of
removal.1 In 2005, Romeo-Calderon had been living in the United States for
nearly a decade, but his brother was the leader of a farmers’ rights organization in
Honduras and was allegedly killed that year for supporting farmers in a land
dispute. Believing that a man named Natividad Hernandez had murdered his
brother, Romero-Calderon placed a telephone call from the United States to a
radio station in Honduras identifying and denouncing Hernandez as the murderer.
Romero-Calderon testified that acquaintances in Honduras informed him that
Hernandez had threatened to kill him as a result. Romero-Calderon filed the
instant application, asserting that he feared persecution by Hernandez and his
associates if he were to return to Honduras.
In denying Romero-Calderon’s application, the BIA found, inter alia, that
Romero-Calderon failed to demonstrate the requisite nexus between his fear of
persecution and a statutorily protected ground. See Kueviakoe v. U.S. Att’y Gen.,
567 F.3d 1301, 1304 (11th Cir. 2009). Substantial evidence supports that finding.
1
Romero-Calderon has abandoned on appeal his claim for relief under the Convention
Against Torture. See Sepulveda v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 401 F.3d 1226, 1228 n.2 (11th Cir. 2005).
2
See id. Indeed, the essence of Romero-Calderon’s application is that Hernandez
and his associates would kill him for exposing and denouncing Hernandez as his
brother’s murderer. Such personal retribution, however, is not a statutorily
protected ground. See Sanchez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 392 F.3d 434, 438 (11th Cir.
2004). Moreover, even assuming that Romero-Calderon was affiliated with his
brother’s farmers’ rights organization (which could arguably constitute a protected
ground), the record does not compel the conclusion that Hernandez or his
associates sought to harm him on account of such affiliation. Accordingly, we
deny Romero-Calderon’s petition.
PETITION DENIED.
3