FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JACKELIN ANTONIA GUERRERO- No. 09-70463
HERNANDEZ; et al.,
Agency Nos. A099-675-928
Petitioners, A099-675-929
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 16, 2010 **
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Jackelin Antonia Guerrero-Hernandez and her son, natives and citizens of El
Salvador, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
dismissing their appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying their
application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
*
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).
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review de novo the BIA’s legal conclusions and review for substantial
evidence factual findings. Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854 (9th Cir. 2009).
We deny the petition for review.
Guerrero-Hernandez does not challenge the BIA’s rejection of her proposed
social group. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that
Guerrero-Hernandez failed to establish the extortion demands and threats from
gang members were on account of a protected ground. See id. at 856 (evidence
supported conclusion that gang victimized the petitioner for economic and personal
reasons rather than on account of a protected ground); see also Parussimova v.
Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[t]he REAL ID Act requires that a
protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s
persecution”). Accordingly, because Guerrero-Hernandez failed to demonstrate
she was persecuted or fears persecution on account of a protected ground, we deny
the petition as to petitioners’ asylum and withholding of removal claims. See
Barrios, 581 F.3d at 856; see Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 865 (9th Cir. 2001)
(“Asylum generally is not available to victims of civil strife, unless they are singled
out on account of a protected ground.”).
2 09-70463
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
petitioners did not establish a likelihood of being tortured in El Salvador. See
Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 747-48 (9th Cir. 2008).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 09-70463