FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 14 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANA CAROLINA CANALES- No. 08-75109
ESTRADA and TATIANA CANALES-
ESTRADA, Agency Nos. A096-181-851
A096-181-852
Petitioners,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 8, 2011 **
Before: FARRIS, O’SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Ana Carolina Canales-Estrada and Tatiana Canales-Estrada, natives and
citizens of Honduras, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
(“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision
*
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).
denying their applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Zehatye v.
Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and deny the petition for
review.
Contrary to petitioners’ contention, the BIA did not question their
credibility, instead finding that even if petitioners identified a cognizable social
group of young Christian women who oppose losing their virginity and/or
Christian values and consequently refuse to acquiesce to sexual advances of gang
members, the evidence did not support their assertion that gang members targeted
them on this basis. Substantial evidence supports that finding. See INS v. Elias-
Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n.1 (1992) (to reverse the agency’s finding “we must
find that the evidence not only supports that conclusion, but compels it”) (emphasis
in original). Accordingly, petitioners’ asylum and withholding of removal claims
fail. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir. 2005).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-75109