UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-1321
EDUARDO EDWIN CERVANTES,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: December 9, 2021 Decided: March 15, 2022
Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert J. Harris, Woodbridge, Virginia, for Petitioner. Brian M. Boynton, Acting Assistant
Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, Taryn L. Arbeiter, Office of
Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Eduardo Edwin Cervantes, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review
of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) adopting and affirming the
immigration judge’s (IJ) decision denying Cervantes’ applications for asylum, withholding
of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). ∗ After
thoroughly reviewing the record, we are satisfied that the evidence does not compel a ruling
contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that
substantial evidence supports the denial of relief, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478,
481 (1992). We agree with the IJ’s determination that Cervantes’ proposed particular
social groups are not cognizable. We further conclude that substantial evidence supports
the IJ’s finding that Cervantes did not establish a clear probability of persecution on
account of an imputed political opinion. Lastly, we conclude that substantial evidence
supports the finding that Cervantes did not demonstrate for protection under the CAT that
he was more likely than not to be tortured with the consent or acquiescence of the
Salvadoran government. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
∗
Cervantes does not challenge the denial of asylum.
2