NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 30 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUIS ALBERTO LOPEZ-ALEJANDRO, No. 18-71173
AKA Alberto Luis,
Agency No. A205-451-170
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 21, 2019**
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, FRIEDLAND and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.
Luis Alberto Lopez-Alejandro, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“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
*
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. Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d
1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for
review.
To the extent Lopez-Alejandro contests the IJ’s denial of his asylum and
CAT claims, we lack jurisdiction to consider those contentions because he failed to
raise them to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir.
2004).
As to withholding of removal, Lopez-Alejandro does not raise an argument
in his opening brief that he suffered past persecution. See Martinez-Serrano v.
INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not specifically raised and
argued in a party’s opening brief are waived). As to Lopez-Alejandro’s claim of
future persecution, substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that
Lopez-Alejandro failed to establish that it is more likely than not that he would be
persecuted 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 INS v.
2 18-71173
Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483 (1992) (an applicant “must provide some
evidence of [motive], direct or circumstantial” (emphasis in original)). Thus,
Lopez-Alejandro’s withholding of removal claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
3 18-71173