DocketNumber： 10-70307
Judges： Rymer, Thomas, Paez
Filed Date： 5/3/2011
Status： Non-Precedential
Modified Date： 11/5/2024
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 03 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROGER ISIDRO-MEJIA, No. 10-70307 Petitioner, Agency No. A094-895-134 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 20, 2011 ** Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. Roger Isidro-Mejia, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals, denying his application for withholding of removal. * 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). Isidro-Mejia contends that the BIA erred in finding no past or future persecution. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that the threats Isidro-Mejia received from gang members did not rise to the level of persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft,319 F.3d 1179
, 1182 (9th Cir. 2003). In addition, the BIA did not err in concluding that even if the threats constituted persecution, petitioner did not show that he was persecuted on account of a protected ground, such as membership in a social group. See Ramos- Barrios v. Holder,581 F.3d 849
, 855- 56 (9th Cir. 2009) (young Guatemalan men who resisted recruitment into gang did not constitute particular social group and refusal to join gang did not amount to “political opinion”). Finally, contrary to Isidro-Mejia’s contention, the BIA’s opinion stated with sufficient particularity and clarity its reasons for dismissing his appeal. See Castillo v. INS,951 F. 2d 1117
, 1121 (9th Cir. 1991). Because Isidro- Mejia failed to demonstrate that he was persecuted on account of a protected ground, we deny the petition seeking withholding of removal relief. See Ramos- Barrios,581 F.3d at 856
. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 10-70307