NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 18 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALFREDO MORENO, No. 14-71132
Petitioner, Agency No. A205-720-231
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 10, 2015**
Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Alfredo Moreno, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,
*
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).
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo
questions of law, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009), for
substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, and de novo claims of due
process violations, Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny
the petition for review.
The agency found Moreno statutorily ineligible for asylum, due to a
conviction for an aggravated felony. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii). Moreno
does not challenge this finding. Thus, we deny the petition as to Moreno’s asylum
claim.
With respect to withholding of removal, substantial evidence supports the
BIA’s finding that Moreno failed to establish any past or future harm was or would
be based on a protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th
Cir. 2010); 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, Moreno’s withholding of removal
claim fails.
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because
Moreno failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or
with the consent or acquiescence of the government of El Salvador if returned.
2 14-71132
See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008).
Finally, we reject Moreno’s contention that the IJ violated his due process
rights. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to
prevail on a due process challenge).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 14-71132