Dante Jorge Rios; Lilia Rosa Zuniga 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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DANTE JORGE RIOS; LILIA ROSA
ZUNIGA,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73953
Agency Nos. A073-122-443
A073-122-446
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Dante Jorge Rios and his wife, Lilia Rosa Zuniga, natives and citizens of
Peru, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their
FILED
APR 14 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-73953 2
application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. §
1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Cruz-
Navarro v. INS, 232 F.3d 1024, 1028 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Rios and Zuniga
failed to demonstrate that they were harmed on account of an imputed political
opinion. See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740-42 (9th Cir. 2009) (the
protected ground has to be “one central reason” for persecution). Accordingly,
Rios and Zuniga’s claim for withholding of removal fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --