FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 28 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YENI MENJIVAR-HERCULES and No. 10-70344
URIEL MENJIVAR-HERCULES,
Agency Nos. A098-119-377
Petitioners, A098-119-378
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, LEAVY and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Petitioners Yeni Menjivar-Hercules and her brother Uriel Menjivar-
Hercules, natives and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review of a Board of
Immigration Appeals order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s
*
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).
decision denying their application for withholding of removal.1 We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the Board’s denial of withholding of removal
because petitioners failed to show they were subject to conduct rising to the level
of persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2003)
(holding unfulfilled threats and an incident of physical violence did not establish
past persecution).
Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s denial of withholding of
removal because petitioners failed to show that gang members threatened them on
account of a protected ground. Their fear of future persecution based on an actual
or imputed anti-gang or anti-crime opinion is not on account of the protected
ground of either membership in a particular social group or political opinion.
Ramos Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-56 (9th Cir. 2009); Santos-Lemus v.
Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008); 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.”) Likewise,
1
Petitioners conceded their asylum application was untimely and did not
request relief under the Convention Against Torture.
2 10-70344
perceived wealth is not a protected ground. Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d
1148, 1151-52 (9th Cir. 2010).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 10-70344