FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 16 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN CAMILO SIERRA MEJIA, No. 08-72619
Petitioner, Agency No. A055-219-282
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009 **
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Juan Camilo Sierra Mejia, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
JT/Research
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992), and we
review de novo claims of due process violations, Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967,
971 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Sierra Mejia’s
brother’s death and the threats against his uncle do not constitute persecution. See
Arriaga-Barrientos v. INS, 937 F.2d 411, 414 (9th Cir. 1991) (requiring that any
pattern of persecution against family members be “closely tied to the petitioner”).
Further, substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Sierra Mejia
failed to establish young men who formerly served in the military constitute a
particular social group. See id. Finally, because Sierra Mejia failed to exhaust his
contentions that he is eligible for asylum on account of his political opinion and his
familial relationship to his brother and uncle, we do not consider them here. See
Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, Sierra
Mejia’s asylum claim fails.
Because Sierra Mejia failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily
failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Zehatye
v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
JT/Research 2 08-72619
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection
because Sierra Mejia failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be
subject to torture if returned to Colombia. See El Himri v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 932,
938 (9th Cir. 2004).
Sierra Mejia’s contention that the agency failed to consider all of the reports
he submitted with respect to conditions in Colombia fails because he did not
overcome the presumption that the agency considered the reports, see
Larita-Martinez v. INS, 220 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (9th Cir. 2000), and he failed to
demonstrate prejudice, see Cuadras v. INS, 910 F.2d 567, 573 (9th Cir. 1990).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
JT/Research 3 08-72619