Maria Barrera-Cruz 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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIA BARRERA-CRUZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73149
Agency No. A072-913-352
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 19, 2010**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Maria Barrera-Cruz, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum and withholding
of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
FILED
JUL 30 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73149 2
substantial evidence, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n. 1 (1992), and we
deny the petition for review.
The BIA denied Barrera-Cruz’s asylum application as time-barred. Barrera-
Cruz does not challenge this finding in her opening brief.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Barrera-Cruz did not
establish past persecution because the 1995 break-in incident and the death and
beating of her cousins were not on account of a protected ground, see id. at 481-83;
see also Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[t]he Real
ID Act requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an
asylum applicant’s persecution”), and the threats from the gang member known as
“Shaggy” did not rise to the level of persecution, see Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 936
(9th Cir. 2000). Barrera-Cruz’s claim for humanitarian asylum necessarily fails
because she did not establish past persecution. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)(iii).
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s finding that Barrera-Cruz did
not establish a clear probability of future persecution, particularly because her
similarly-situated family members remain in El Salvador unharmed. See Hakeem
v. INS, 273 F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir. 2001). Accordingly, Barrera-Cruz’s
withholding of removal claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --