United States v. 2020-02-13 | 17-70259 | GABRIEL FERNANDO-PULIDO V. WILLIAM BARR | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GABRIEL FERNANDO-PULIDO, AKA
Luis Gerardo Diaz Ortiz,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent.

No. 17-70259

Agency No. A096-549-910

MEMORANDUM
*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 11, 2020
**

Pasadena, California

Before: BERZON, R. NELSON, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

Gabriel Fernando-Pulido petitions for review of the Board of Immigration
Appeals’ decision to affirm the denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and
relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We review such denials for
substantial evidence and will only reverse if the evidence “compels” a contrary

*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED

FEB 13 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2
result. Silva-Pereira v. Lynch, 827 F.3d 1176, 1184 (9th Cir. 2016); Parussimova
v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 738–39 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition.
1. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that there was
no nexus between Fernando-Pulido’s feared harm and his kinship ties, which is
required for asylum and withholding of removal claims. See Guo v. Sessions, 897
F.3d 1208, 1213 (9th Cir. 2018). While Fernando-Pulido’s family members have
apparently suffered a series of tragic events, they do not appear to be related to
each other. Nor do they suggest that Fernando-Pulido himself may face
persecution based on these kinship ties.
Fernando-Pulido alleges that his grandmother was murdered, but he admits
that he does not know why she was killed. Fernando-Pulido also states that his
aunt was kidnapped, but his testimony conflicts with his aunt’s testimony about
who carried out the kidnapping. Finally, Fernando-Pulido himself admitted to the
BIA that there was no indication that the man who threatened his brother had any
connection with the other men who allegedly harmed his family.
2. Substantial evidence also supports the denial of CAT relief. To
qualify for CAT relief, an alien must establish a likelihood of torture if removed to
the proposed country of removal. Cole v. Holder, 659 F.3d 762, 770 (9th Cir.
2011). Torture requires the harm to be “inflicted by or at the instigation of or with
the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official

3
capacity.” 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18(a)(1). There is little evidence in the record that the
men who murdered Pulido’s grandmother were related to the government. Indeed,
Fernando-Pulido himself admits that he does not have any proof of that beyond his
testimony, which is based on secondhand information from his mother and aunt.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED