NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 19 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SELVYN MANUEL JUAREZ-DOMINGO, No. 18-70887
Petitioner, Agency No. A202-029-899
v.
MEMORANDUM*
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 12, 2019**
Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Selvyn Manuel Juarez-Domingo, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeal’s (“BIA”) order dismissing
his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for
asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture
(“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
*
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).
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 Juarez-Domingo’s challenges to the IJ’s
time bar determination because he did not raise them before the BIA. See Barron
v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to
review claims not presented to the agency).
Juarez-Domingo fears harm in Guatemala based on his family membership.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Juarez-Domingo
failed to establish that any harm he experienced or fears in Guatemala was or
would be on account of a protected ground. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095,
1097 (9th Cir. 2011) (even if membership in a particular social group is
established, an applicant must still show that “persecution was or will be on
account of his membership in such group” (emphasis in original)); see also
Barajas-Romero v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 351, 356-60 (9th Cir. 2017) (discussing the
respective nexus requirements for asylum and withholding of removal claims);
Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“An [applicant’s] desire to
be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by
gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, Juarez-Domingo’s
asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
2 18-70887
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Juarez-Domingo failed to show that it is more likely than not that he would be
tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of Guatemala.
See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
Finally, Juarez-Domingo’s request to remand is denied. See Karingithi v.
Whitaker, 913 F.3d 1158, 1160-62 (9th Cir. 2019) (initial notice to appear need not
include time and date information to vest jurisdiction in the immigration court).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
3 18-70887