NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 3 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JILBERT MANSOURI, No. 17-72645
Petitioner, Agency No. A097-093-324
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting
Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 27, 2018**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Jilbert Mansouri, a native and citizen of Iran, petitions 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 relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
*
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).
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir.
2006). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that the harm Mansouri
suffered did not rise to the level of persecution. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d
1049, 1059-60 (9th Cir. 2009) (petitioner failed to establish past persecution where
he was beaten and robbed on two occasions and accosted by a mob). Substantial
evidence also supports the BIA’s finding that Mansouri did not establish a well-
founded fear of future persecution. See id. at 1060 (objective risk is established by
a “‘reasonable possibility’ that [petitioner] will be ‘singled out individually for
persecution’”). Thus, his asylum claim fails.
In this case, Mansouri failed to establish eligibility for asylum, therefore, he
did not establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Zehatye, 453 F.3d at
1190. Thus, his withholding of removal claim fails.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Mansouri failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be tortured by or
with the consent or acquiescence of the Iranian government. See Aden v. Holder,
589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
2 17-72645
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 17-72645