NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 31 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GUILLERMO CASTILLO AVILA, No. 15-71134
Petitioner, Agency No. A079-154-110
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 24, 2016**
Before: REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER, and, OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Guillermo Castillo Avila, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
(“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755
F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2014). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition
for review.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Castillo Avila’s contention that his
conviction does not bar his claims for asylum and withholding of removal, and his
contentions regarding cancellation of removal, because he failed to raise these
issues to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004)
(petitioner must exhaust issues in administrative proceedings below).
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of Castillo Avila’s CAT
claim because he failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be tortured by
the Mexican government, or with its consent or acquiescence. See Garcia-
Milian, 755 F.3d at 1034; Zheng v. Holder, 644 F.3d 829, 835 (9th Cir. 2011)
(“claims of possible torture remain speculative”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
2 15-71134