Alejandro Garcia Benitez, a.k.a Pedro Raul Martinez 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).
JLA/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALEJANDRO GARCIA BENITEZ, a.k.a
Pedro Raul Martinez,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73866
Agency No. A073-445-638
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Alejandro Garcia Benitez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,
FILED
FEB 23 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

JLA/Research 07-73866 2
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
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.
The opening brief does not challenge the agency’s finding that Garcia-
Benitez’s asylum application was time-barred.
We reject Garcia-Benitez’s contention that he was persecuted on account of
his membership in a protected class. See Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 945-
46 (9th Cir. 2007); see also Sanchez-Trujillo v. INS, 801 F.2d 1571, 1573, 1576-77
(9th Cir. 1986). Furthermore, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s findings that
Garcia-Benitez failed to provide an objective basis for future fear of persecution,
see Fakhry v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1057, 1065-66 (9th Cir. 2008), and that Garcia-
Benitez could relocate within Mexico, see 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(3)(i) (in the
absence of past persecution, petitioner bears the burden of showing that internal
relocation is unreasonable).

-- 2 of 3 --

JLA/Research 07-73866 3
Because there is no evidence that he would be tortured by or with the
acquiescence of a government official, Garcia-Benitez has not demonstrated his
eligibility for CAT relief. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir.
2008).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --