FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 24 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANA MARIA PEREZ-RAMIREZ, No. 08-72863
Petitioner, Agency No. A098-714-023
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2014**
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Ana Maria Perez-Ramirez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro
se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum and
withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
*
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 substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, Gormley v. Ashcroft, 364
F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 2004), and we deny the petition for review.
Perez-Ramirez testified an unidentified man threatened her in El Salvador
and that she feared gangs in El Salvador. Substantial evidence supports the
agency’s determination that Perez-Ramirez failed to show any harm to her was or
would be motivated by a protected ground. See Bolshakov v. INS, 133 F.3d 1279,
1280-81 (9th Cir. 1998) (criminal acts bore no nexus to a protected ground); see
also Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009) (the REAL ID
Act “requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum
applicant’s persecution”). Thus, Perez-Ramirez’s asylum and withholding of
removal claims fail. See Dinu v. Ashcroft, 372 F.3d 1041, 1045 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-72863