Giovanni Pineda v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 28 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GIOVANNI ALEXANDER PINEDA; No. 08-71180
MIRNA GARCIA PINEDA,
Agency Nos. A098-437-969
Petitioners, A098-437-968
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Giovanni Alexander Pineda and Mirna Garcia Pineda, husband and wife and
natives and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review of a Board of Immigration
Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s
*
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).
NED/Research
decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal and
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey,
512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except to the extent that deference is owed to
the BIA’s determination of the governing statutes and regulations, Simeonov v.
Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We review factual findings for
substantial evidence. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir.
2006). We deny the petition for review.
We reject the Pinedas’ claim that they are eligible for asylum and
withholding of removal based on Giovanni Pineda’s membership in a particular
social group, namely, young El Salvadorean males retaliated against for refusing to
join gangs, or on account of his anti-gang political opinion. See Santos-Lemus v.
Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008) (rejecting as a particular social
group “young men in El Salvador resisting gang violence”) (internal quotation
omitted); Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 855-56 (9th Cir. 2009) (refusal to join a
gang does not amount to a political opinion).
Accordingly, because the Pinedas failed to demonstrate that they were
persecuted or fear persecution on account of a protected ground, we deny the
NED/Research 2 08-71180
petition as to the asylum and withholding of removal claims. See Barrios, 581
F.3d at 856.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief based on its
finding that the Pinedas did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the
instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran
government. See Zheng v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
NED/Research 3 08-71180