Santo Wahyudi 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).
NED/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SANTO WAHYUDI,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71892
Agency No. A095-629-755
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Santo Wahyudi, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
FILED
DEC 28 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

NED/Research 07-71892 2
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Zehatye v. Gonzales,
453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency denied Wahyudi’s asylum application as time-barred. Wahyudi
does not challenge this finding in his opening brief.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that the physical harm
and threats Wahyudi suffered in Indonesia did not rise to the level of past
persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2003)
(harassment, threats, and one beating did not compel a finding of past persecution).
Substantial evidence further supports the agency’s finding that Wahyudi failed to
establish a clear probability of future persecution because Wahyudi remained
unharmed in Indonesia for four years following the last incident, and he has
similarly-situated moderate Muslim family members who continue to remain in
Indonesia without harm. See Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 938 (9th Cir. 2000).
Wahyudi does not raise any arguments in his opening brief regarding the
denial of CAT relief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th
Cir. 1996) (issues which are not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening
brief are waived).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --