Manuel Pineda 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MANUEL PINEDA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73592
Agency No. A073-989-753
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 16, 2010**
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Manuel Pineda, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming an immigration judge’s decision
denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. 1252.
FILED
NOV 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73592 2
We review for substantial evidence, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85
(9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Pineda failed
to establish a nexus between the persecution he fears in Guatemala and a statutorily
protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 482 (1992); Gormley
v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 2004) (random criminal acts bore no
nexus to a protected ground). Accordingly, Pineda’s asylum and withholding of
removal claims fail.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s determination that Pineda is
not eligible for CAT relief because he failed to show it is more likely than not he
would be tortured if removed to Guatemala. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d
1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --