NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 13 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE SOTO-REYNOSO, No. 16-71120
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-806-094
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 10, 2018**
Before: CANBY, W. FLETCHER, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Jose Soto-Reynoso, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
*
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).
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
findings. Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1012 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the
petition for review.
In his opening brief, Soto-Reynoso does not challenge the agency’s
conclusion that he failed to establish his proposed social group of “business
owners,” was cognizable. See Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 n.5
(9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Soto-Reynoso failed to
establish it is more likely than not that he will be persecuted in Mexico based on
his familial ties. See Hakeem v. INS, 273 F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir. 2001) (“An
applicant’s claim of persecution upon return is weakened, even undercut, when
similarly-situated family members continue to live in the country without
incident[.]”). Thus, we deny the petition as to Soto-Reynoso’s withholding of
removal claim.
Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
because Soto-Reynoso failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be
tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of Mexico. See
Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (2009).
2 16-71120
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 16-71120