Budianto Kusno 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
BUDIANTO KUSNO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72475
Agency No. A089-671-909
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 10, 2012**
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Budianto Kusno, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
FILED
SEP 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

10-72475 2
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir.
2009). We deny petition for review.
The record does not compel reversal of the BIA’s finding that Kusno’s
experiences in Indonesia, including the bike robbery, the pickpocketing incident on
a bus, and his family’s encounter with rioters during the May 1998 riots, even
considered cumulatively, do not constitute past persecution. See id. at 1059-60;
Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2003) (unfulfilled threats and one
incident of physical violence did not compel a finding of past persecution).
Further, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Kusno failed to
demonstrate sufficient individualized risk of harm under a disfavored group
analysis to establish a well-founded fear of persecution. See Halim v. Holder, 590
F.3d 971, 979 (9th Cir. 2009) (petitioner failed to show individual risk of harm
where he “failed to offer any evidence that distinguishes his exposure from those
of all other ethnic Chinese Indonesians”). Accordingly, Kusno’s asylum claim
fails.
Because Kusno failed to establish his eligibility for asylum, he necessarily
fails to meet the higher standard of eligibility for withholding of removal. See
Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).

-- 2 of 3 --

10-72475 3
Finally, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Kusno failed to
show it is more likely than not he will be tortured if he returns to Indonesia. See
Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1067-68. Accordingly, his CAT claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --