Gustavo Barrios v. Eric Holder, Jr.

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 01 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GUSTAVO ADOLFO BARRIOS; JULIA No. 10-71151
GUADALUPE MARROQUIN,
Agency Nos. A071-602-075
Petitioners, A070-947-574
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 23, 2014**
Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Gustavo Adolfo Barrios and Julia Guadalupe Marroquin, natives and
citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
(“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision
denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under
*
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).
the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings.
Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the
petition for review.
With respect to past harm, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding
that guerrillas targeted Barrios for recruitment because he had experience in using
military armaments and not on account of a protected ground, including his actual
or imputed political opinion. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 482 (1992).
With respect to Barrios’s fear of future harm, Barrios testified he does not fear
persecution by the guerrillas if he returns to Guatemala. And, Barrios does not
challenge the BIA’s findings regarding his fear of future gang violence in
Guatemala. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996)
(issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).
Thus, Barrios’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See
Molina-Morales v. INS, 237 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2001).
Finally, Barrios does not challenge the BIA’s denial of CAT relief. See
Martinez-Serrano, 94 F.3d at 1259-60.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 10-71151