NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 2 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CRUZ LORENZO CALMO, AKA Cruz No. 14-72653
Lorenzo, AKA Mario Mendoza,
Agency No. A098-950-559
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 25, 2016**
Before: LEAVY, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Cruz Lorenzo Calmo, 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 decision denying his application for withholding of removal
and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
*
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).
jurisdiction under 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),
and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that, even if Lorenzo
Calmo established past persecution on account of his Mam ethnicity and familial
relationship to his father, there has been a fundamental change in circumstances in
Guatemala such that the government rebutted the presumption that his life or
freedom would be threatened upon his return on account of a protected ground.
See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(1)(A); see Gonzales-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d
995, 1000 (9th Cir. 2003) (agency properly provided “an individualized analysis of
how changed conditions will affect the specific petitioner’s situation”) (internal
quotation marks omitted). Lorenzo Calmo’s contention that the agency applied an
incorrect legal standard is unpersuasive. Thus, we deny the petition for review as
to Lorenzo Calmo’s claim for withholding of removal.
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because
Lorenzo Calmo failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be tortured
2 14-72653
by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Guatemalan government. See Silaya,
524 F.3d at 1073.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 14-72653