Denis Alexander Amaya- Flores 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 finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
JLA/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DENIS ALEXANDER AMAYA-
FLORES,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72724
Agency No. A098-592-918
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Denis Alexander Amaya-Flores, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
FILED
NOV 30 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

JLA/Research 08-72724 2
dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his
application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention
Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo
questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except
to the extent that deference is owed to the BIA’s determination of the governing
statutes and regulations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004).
We review factual findings for substantial evidence. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453
F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
We reject Amaya-Flores’s claim that he is eligible for asylum and
withholding of removal based on his membership in a particular social group,
namely, young El Salvadoran males who refuse to join gangs. See Santos-Lemus v.
Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008) (rejecting as a particular social
group “young men in El Salvador resisting gang violence”) (internal quotation
omitted); Ramos-Lopez v. Holder, 563 F.3d 855, 860-62 (9th Cir. 2009) (rejecting
as a particular social group “young Honduran men who have been recruited by [a
gang], but who refuse to join”).
Accordingly, because Amaya-Flores failed to demonstrate that he was
persecuted on account of a protected ground, we deny the petition as to his asylum

-- 2 of 3 --

JLA/Research 08-72724 3
and withholding of removal claims. See Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 856 (9th
Cir. 2009).
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s conclusion that Amaya-Flores
failed to demonstrate a clear probability he will be tortured by the government or
with the government’s acquiescence if returned to El Salvador. See Wakkary v.
Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --