NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 15 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MIGUEL CASTANEDA ARAUJO, No. 20-70776
Petitioner, Agency No. A092-673-050
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted June 16, 2021
San Francisco, California
Before: SCHROEDER, M. SMITH, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
Miguel Araujo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the
denial of his applications for withholding of removal and protection under the
Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.1
Because the record does not compel the conclusion that Araujo is a credible
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
1
Because the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of the case,
we recite only those facts necessary to decide the appeal.
witness—nor does it compel the conclusion that he is eligible for withholding of
removal or CAT relief—we deny the petition for review.
We review for substantial evidence an adverse credibility determination,
Mukulumbutu v. Barr, 977 F.3d 924, 925 (9th Cir. 2020), as well as the denial of
withholding of removal and CAT relief. Guo v. Sessions, 897 F.3d 1208, 1212 (9th
Cir. 2018).
1. Araujo first challenges the agency’s adverse credibility finding,
asserting that his medical conditions caused his forgetfulness and that he should be
deemed credible based on the totality of the circumstances. But Araujo’s argument
that his medical conditions caused him to repeatedly omit an alleged assassination
attempt on his life until the middle of proceedings—one of the main bases for the
agency’s credibility determination—does not compel the conclusion that he is
credible. The rest of Araujo’s credible fear interviews and declaration (where the
murder attempt was omitted) are full of clear, highly detailed information from
Araujo’s past, undermining his claimed memory problems. The agency’s adverse
credibility determination based on significant omissions and discrepancies between
Araujo’s written and oral testimony is supported by substantial evidence, and Araujo
therefore fails to establish that he experienced past persecution.
2. Araujo otherwise asks this court to grant his application for withholding
of removal, but the record does not compel “that it is more likely than not that he
2
would be subject to persecution” on a protected ground. Guo, 897 F.3d at 1213
(citation omitted). For instance, although Araujo provided documentary evidence
that his brother and a number of alleged colleagues have been killed or kidnapped in
Mexico, the evidence does not identify who murdered or kidnapped them or the
motives for such acts to establish a clear probability that Araujo will be persecuted
on a similar ground. See Davila v. Barr, 968 F.3d 1136, 1142 (9th Cir. 2020)
(requiring petitioner to show “by a ‘clear probability’ that the petitioner’s life or
freedom would be threatened in the proposed country of removal” (citation
omitted)). There was also evidence of other colleagues—two witnesses who
testified on Araujo’s behalf—who engaged in similar activity and had not been
harmed. Accordingly, the record fails to compel the conclusion that Araujo
established eligibility for withholding of removal.
3. Araujo finally argues that he is entitled to CAT relief, largely based on
the same evidence he presents in support of his withholding of removal claim but
also based on country conditions evidence. While the record reflects some human
rights issues and problems for journalists in Mexico as a general matter, the evidence
of Araujo’s particular situation, together with the country conditions evidence, do
not compel the conclusion that “it is ‘more likely than not’ that [he] will be tortured”
if removed to Mexico. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1053 (9th Cir. 2009)
(quoting 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2)).
3
The petition for review is DENIED.
4