FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 27 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RUDY DJAJA, No. 11-73444
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-634-715
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 19, 2013**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Rudy Djaja, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for withholding of removal. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
*
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).
agency’s factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir.
2009). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that the harm
Djaja suffered in Indonesia does not rise to the level of persecution. See Halim v.
Holder, 590 F.3d 971, 975-76 (9th Cir. 2009). Further, substantial evidence
supports the agency’s determination that, even under a disfavored group analysis,
Djaja failed to show sufficient individualized risk to establish that it is more likely
than not he would be persecuted if removed to Indonesia. See id. at 979; see also
Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1066 (“[a]n applicant for withholding of removal will need
to adduce a considerably larger quantum of individualized-risk evidence to prevail
than would an asylum applicant”). We reject Djaja’s contentions that the IJ
applied the disfavored group analysis incorrectly. Accordingly, Djaja’s
withholding of removal claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 11-73444