FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 18 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DELILA LOPEZ-DE MOLINA, No. 10-72817
Petitioner, Agency No. A098-590-608
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 10, 2013 **
Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
Delila Lopez-De Molina, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
*
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).
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence the agency’s factual findings. Hu v. Holder, 652 F.3d 1011, 1016 (9th
Cir. 2011). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we
remand.
The agency denied Lopez-De Molina’s CAT claim because she failed to
show it is more likely than not she will be tortured by guerrillas or gangs with the
consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to El Salvador. Substantial
evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524
F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008).
The agency denied asylum and withholding of removal because it found
Lopez-De Molina’s rape by guerrillas did not occur on account of a protected
ground, and that she was merely the victim of crime or a recruitment effort.
Substantial evidence, however, does not support the agency’s nexus determination
because the evidence establishes an imputed political opinion (due to her suspected
relationship to the military and/or police) was at least one central reason for the
rape. See Hu, 652 F.3d at 1018-20 (imputed political opinion was a motivating
factor in petitioner’s abuse); Kebede v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 808, 812 (9th Cir. 2004)
(rape on account of petitioner’s family background). Accordingly, we grant the
petition as to Lopez-De Molina’s asylum and withholding of removal claims, and
2 10-72817
remand for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. See INS v.
Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.
3 10-72817