Gabriel Garcia Yanagui, aka Garcia Gabriel, aka Gabriel Garcia, aka Gabriel Garcia… 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
GABRIEL GARCIA YANAGUI, aka
Garcia Gabriel, aka Gabriel Garcia, aka
Gabriel Garcia Yanaqui,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-73674
Agency No. A073-928-002
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010 **
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Gabriel Garcia Yanagui, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying his motion to reopen,
in which he challenged the denial of his application for relief from removal.
FILED
SEP 21 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-73674 2
Petitioner contends that country conditions have changed in Mexico thereby
excusing the time and numerical bars to reopening his asylum, withholding, and
Convention Against Torture claims. Yanagui also contends that he would be
persecuted because he would be perceived as wealthy and a potential kidnapping
victim because he is a Mexicans returning from the United States, thereby entitling
him to asylum, withholding, and CAT relief. Petitioner failed to establish changed
country conditions in Mexico that are material to petitioner and his circumstances.
See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th
Cir. 2008). In addition, petitioner failed to establish that he qualified as a member
of a cognizable social group, and therefore did not demonstrate prima facie
eligibility for the asylum, and withholding relief requested. See Delgado-Ortiz v.
Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1151-52 (9th Cir. 2010) (rejecting as a particular social
group “returning Mexicans from the United States”). Petitioner also failed to
establish that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if returned to
Mexico, and thereby he failed to establish prima facie eligibility for CAT
protection. See id. at 1152.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --