William Lopez-Romero v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General

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).
jlf/Inventory
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WILLIAM LOPEZ-ROMERO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-71802
Agency No. A098-854-646
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
San Francisco, California
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
William Lopez-Romero, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se
for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal
FILED
FEB 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

jlf/Inventory 08-71802 2
from the immigration judge’s denial of his applications for asylum and withholding
of removal.
We reject Lopez-Romero’s claim that he is eligible for asylum and
withholding of removal which is based on his contention that he will be recruited
by gangs if he returns to El Salvador, and this will result in persecution. Lopez-
Romero does not establish a protected ground based on his alleged membership in
a particular social group, namely El Salvador males who refuse to join gangs, or
based on his anti-gang political opinion. See Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-
56 (9th Cir. 2009) (refusal to join a gang does not amount to political opinion);
Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008) (rejecting as a
particular social group “young men in El Salvador resisting gang violence.”)
Accordingly, because Lopez-Romero failed to demonstrate that he was
persecuted on account of a protected ground, we deny the petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --