Beezy Portillo-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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BEEZY PORTILLO-MARTINEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74404
Agency No. A098-212-156
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.
Beezy Portillo-Martinez, native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum and
FILED
SEP 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74404 2
withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
for substantial evidence factual findings. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481
& n.1 (1992). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Portillo-Martinez
did not demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution because
she has not shown the harm she suffered or fears was on account of a protected
ground. See id. at 481-82. Further, substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s
finding that Portillo-Martinez could relocate safely within El Salvador. See
Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 867-68 (9th Cir. 2001).
Because Portillo-Martinez failed to meet the lower burden of proof for
asylum, it follows that she has not met the higher standard for withholding of
removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --