FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 24 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAJIV SHARMA; RAKESH SHARMA; No. 09-73627
RAJESH SHARMA,
Agency Nos. A047-069-508
Petitioners, A047-069-509
A047-069-510
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, MEMORANDUM*
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 8, 2013**
Portland, Oregon
Before: ALARCÓN, M. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Rajiv Sharma, Rakesh Sharma, and Rajesh Sharma petition for review of a
final order of removal issued by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The
order affirmed the denial by an immigration judge of the petitioners’ applications
*
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).
for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention against Torture
(CAT). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and we deny the
petition.
1. The record before the BIA did not compel the conclusion that the
petitioners face a likelihood of persecution if removed to India. No petitioner has
been harmed, harassed, or threatened by anyone in India, and when Rajiv Sharma
and Rajesh Sharma returned to India in 2000, they had no problems with the
police. The denial of the petitioners’ applications for withholding of removal was
therefore supported by substantial evidence.
2. The BIA also did not err in denying protection under the CAT. The
record before the BIA did not compel the conclusion that it is more likely than not
that the petitioners will be tortured if they are returned to India.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED
2