FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 08 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AMBAR WIBOWO, No. 06-72334
Petitioner, Agency No. A079-643-138
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Ambar Wibowo, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
*
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).
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings,
Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009), and we deny the petition
for review.
Even if Wibowo timely filed his asylum application, substantial evidence
supports the agency’s conclusion that Wibowo did not establish that he was or
would be persecuted on account of an actual or imputed political opinion. See INS
v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n.1 (1992); see also Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d
1482, 1489-91 (9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, Wibowo’s asylum and withholding
of removal claims fail. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir.
2005).
Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
because Wibowo failed to establish it is more likely than not that he would be
tortured if returned to Indonesia. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1068.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 06-72334
Wibowo v. Holder
Combined Opinion