Fatima Maribel Maldonado- Chinchilla 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
FATIMA MARIBEL MALDONADO-
CHINCHILLA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74615
Agency No. A078-179-698
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Fatima Maribel Maldonado-Chinchilla, a native and citizen of Honduras,
petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing
her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ’s) decision denying her application for
asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture
FILED
JUL 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74615 2
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence, Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 933 (9th Cir. 2000), and we deny the petition
for review.
Maldonado-Chinchilla testified that her boyfriend raped her, and that she
suffered other domestic violence. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding
that Maldonado-Chinchilla did not establish the abuse she suffered constituted
persecution because she failed to show the government was unwilling or unable to
protect her from her boyfriend. See Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 1069,
1072 (9th Cir. 2005) (petitioner who did not report being raped by her boyfriend to
authorities did not show “that an agent of the government of Honduras committed
the rapes, or that the government of Honduras is unable or unwilling to control
rape in that country”).
Because Maldonado-Chinchilla did not establish eligibility for asylum, it
follows that she did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of
removal. See id.
Finally, substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s denial of CAT relief
because petitioner failed to show it is more likely than not that she would be
tortured if removed to Honduras. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68
(9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --