NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAN 21 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
MARIA DE LAS NIEVES REYES- No. 08-70738
VELAZQUEZ,
Agency No. A097-351-250
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 10, 2010 **
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Maria de las Nieves Reyes-Velazquez, a native and citizen of Mexico,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her applications for
withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture
*
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).
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir.
2006). We deny the petition for review.
Reyes-Velazquez was not threatened or harmed in Mexico by anyone, and
she has not established that her brother-in-law’s political opponents have imputed
or are likely to impute a political opinion to her. See Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d
1482, 1489-90 (9th Cir. 1997). Further, Reyes-Velazquez has not established that
the incidents her brother and uncle experienced had any connection to her, see
Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1060 (9th Cir. 2009), or that they occurred on
account of a protected ground, see Gormley v.Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1176-77
(9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding
that Reyes-Velazquez failed to establish a clear probability of persecution on
account of an imputed political opinion or her membership in a particular social
group. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1166, 1170-72 (9th Cir. 2005).
Reyes-Velazquez has not made any argument regarding the agency’s denial
of CAT relief. 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).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-70738