FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 15 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
EKA PEBRI, No. 10-72720
Petitioner, Agency No. A088-121-083
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 9, 2012 **
Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Eka Pebri, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her claim for asylum, and protection under
the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings
and review de novo the agency’s legal determinations. Wakkary v. Holder, 558
F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s decision that, even under a
disfavored group analysis, Pebri failed to establish sufficient individualized risk of
harm to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution. See Halim v. Holder, 590
F.3d 971, 977-79 (9th Cir. 2009). The record belies Pebri’s contention that the
BIA found ethnic Chinese Indonesians are no longer a disfavored group.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection
because Pebri did not establish it is more likely than not she will be tortured in
Indonesia. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1067-68 (no evidence that petitioner would
be tortured). In light of this conclusion, we do not address Pebri’s argument that
the BIA exceeded the scope of its review in analyzing government acquiesce.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 10-72720