Marcos Santos-Vasquez v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 28 2009 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARCOS ANTONIO SANTOS- No. 08-74332 VASQUEZ, Agency No. A097-818-398 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ** Submitted December 15, 2009 Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and FISHER, Circuit Judges. Marcos Antonio Santos-Vasquez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals 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). MVD/Inventory withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review factual findings for substantial evidence, Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir. 2008), and deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s denial of asylum and withholding of removal because Santos-Vasquez failed to show his alleged persecutors threatened him on account of a protected ground. His fear of future persecution based on an actual or imputed anti-gang or anti-crime opinion is not on account of the protected ground of either membership in a particular social group or political opinion. See Ramos Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-56 (9th Cir. 2009); Santos-Lemus at 745-46; see Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 865 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Asylum generally is not available to victims of civil strife, unless they are singled out on account of a protected ground.”) Because Santos-Vasquez’s contention is foreclosed by our case law, we deny his request to remand for further development of the record. Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s denial of CAT relief based on the Board’s finding that Santos-Vasquez did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran government. See Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir. 2007). MVD/Inventory 2 08-74332 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. MVD/Inventory 3 08-74332