FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 19 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ARUSYAK HOVAKIMYAN, No. 08-72654
Petitioner, Agency No. A097-356-378
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 12, 2011 **
Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Arusyak Hovakimyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her 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 factual
findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we
deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Hovakimyan failed
to establish she suffered past persecution on account of a protected ground because
there is no evidence that she was raped because of her parents’ religious beliefs.
See Donchev v. Mukasey, 553 F.3d 1206, 1214-15 (9th Cir. 2009) (concluding the
petitioner’s mistreatment was not on account of a protected ground where there
were no contemporaneous declarations demonstrating the attackers’ motivation).
Accordingly, because Hovakimyan failed to demonstrate that she was persecuted
on account of a protected ground, we deny the petition as to her asylum and
withholding of removal claims. See Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 856 (9th Cir.
2009).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Hovakimyan has not established she would be tortured by or with the acquiescence
of the Armenian government. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th
Cir. 2008).
Finally, because the BIA accepted Hovakimyan’s testimony as credible, her
motion to remand was rendered moot.
2 08-72654
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 08-72654