Luis Armando Reyes v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUIS ARMANDO REYES,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-72175
Agency No. A072-400-622
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 7, 2014**
Before: TASHIMA, GRABER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Luis Armando Reyes, a native and citizen of El Salvador, 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 and
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
FILED
APR 11 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

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 the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Reyes failed
to establish the harm he suffered at the hands of guerrillas was on account of a
protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 482 (1992).
Consequently, Reyes is not entitled to a rebuttable presumption of a well-founded
fear of future persecution, and is not eligible for humanitarian asylum. See 8
C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1). The BIA found Reyes waived any claim that he had a
well-founded fear of future persecution in the absence of a showing of past
persecution. Reyes does not challenge the BIA’s finding.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Reyes’ CAT claim
because he failed to demonstrate it is more likely than not he would be tortured by
or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official in El Salvador. See Silaya
v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). We reject Reyes’ contention that
the agency failed to fully or properly analyze his CAT claim.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
12-72175 2

-- 2 of 2 --