Norberto Jr. Tojino Leano v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NORBERTO JR. TOJINO LEANO,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-72702
Agency No. A098-467-399
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 14, 2015**
Before: SILVERMAN, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Norberto Jr. Tojino Leano, a native and citizen of the Philippines, 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 withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
FILED
OCT 21 2015
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 --

review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales,
453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Leano’s experiences
in the Philippines did not rise to the level of persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft,
319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2003) (unfulfilled threats constituted harassment,
not persecution). Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s determination that
Leano failed to establish an objectively reasonable fear of future harm in the
Philippines. See Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1022 (9th Cir. 2006) (petitioner
failed to “present compelling, objective evidence demonstrating a well-founded
fear of persecution”). We reject Leano’s contention that the BIA applied an
incorrect legal standard. Thus, Leano’s asylum claim fails.
Because Leano failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed
to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Zehatye, 453
F.3d at 1190.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-72702 2

-- 2 of 2 --