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NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 28 2011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
WILLIAM OSMIN SERRANO No. 10-71937
GUILLEN,
Agency No. A088-451-711
Petitioner,
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.
William Osmin Serrano Guillen, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions
for review of a 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). Our
*
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).
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part
the petition for review.
Because Guillen’s opening brief has not “specifically and distinctly argued
and raised” challenges to the untimeliness of his asylum application and the denial
of CAT relief, he has waived those claims. Arpin v. Santa Clara Valley Transp.
Agency, 261 F.3d 912, 919 (9th Cir. 2001); Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d
1069, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005).
Substantial evidence supports the Board’s denial of withholding of removal
because Guillen failed to show his alleged persecutors threatened him on account
of a protected ground. His 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.”) We decline to address Guillen’s
unexhausted contention that gang members targeted him for persecution on
account of his membership in a family social group. Ontiveros-Lopez v. INS,
2 10-71937
213 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir. 2000) (declining to consider a claim that Board did
not have first opportunity to consider).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
3 10-71937