FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 3 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE EXEQUIEL ALVARES No. 13-70533
CATALAN,
Agency No. A072-519-613
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 23, 2014**
Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Jose Exequiel Alvares Catalan, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from
the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
*
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).
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182,
1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for
review.
Alvares Catalan does not raise any contentions regarding past persecution.
See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not
specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).
The IJ denied Alvares Catalan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims
because he did not articulate a particular social group or otherwise identify a
protected ground on the basis of which he fears persecution. See Zetino v. Holder,
622 F.3d 1007, 1015 (9th Cir. 2010). We lack jurisdiction to review Alvares
Catalan’s contention, raised for the first time before this court, that he is a member
of a particular social group comprised of his family. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358
F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not raised
to the agency). Apart from this contention, Alvares Catalan does not otherwise
challenge the IJ’s nexus finding. Thus, we deny the petition as to Alvares
Catalan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims.
Finally, substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
because Alvares Catalan failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be
2 13-70533
tortured by the Guatemalan government, or with its consent or acquiescence. See
Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
3 13-70533