FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 03 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE LUIS ANGUIANO-AGUIRRE, No. 08-72965
Petitioner, Agency No. A092-685-965
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 24, 2011 **
Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Jose Luis Anguiano-Aguirre, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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 relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
*
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 under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings, and we review de novo the agency’s legal
determinations. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We
deny the petition for review.
The record does not compel the conclusion that Anguiano-Aguirre’s
untimely asylum application was filed within a reasonable period of time given any
changed or extraordinary circumstances. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(4), (5); Dhital
v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 1044, 1050 (9th Cir. 2008) (application filed 22 months after
expiration of lawful nonimmigrant status expired was not reasonable).
Accordingly, his asylum claim fails.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that the gang member’s
threat to Anguiano-Aguirre did not rise to the level of persecution. See Hoxha v.
Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2003) (unfulfilled threats constituted
harassment rather than persecution). In addition, substantial evidence supports the
agency finding that Anguiano-Aguirre has not established a clear probability of
future persecution. See Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003)
(possibility of future persecution too speculative); see also Hakeem v. INS, 273
F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir. 2001) (“An applicant’s claim of persecution upon return is
weakened, even undercut, when similarly-situated family members continue to live
2 08-72965
in the country without incident . . . or when the applicant has returned to the
country without incident.”) (internal quotations and citations omitted).
Accordingly, his withholding of removal claim fails.
Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Anguiano-
Aguirre’s CAT claim because he failed to show that it is more likely than not that
he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of Mexican authorities if
returned to Mexico. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1067-68.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 08-72965