Edgar Arnoldo Rivera-Zuniga 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
EDGAR ARNOLDO RIVERA-ZUNIGA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-71384
Agency No. A071-580-348
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 27, 2011**
Before: SILVERMAN, W. FLETCHER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Edgar Arnoldo Rivera-Zuniga, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for
withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
OCT 6 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 10-71384
for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey,
542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir. 2008), and we review de novo claims of due process
violations, Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Rivera-Zuniga failed to
establish a clear probability of future persecution because he failed to show the
harm he and his family suffered was on account of a protected ground. See INS v.
Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481-82 (1992). Accordingly, his withholding of
removal claim fails.
In addition, we reject Rivera-Zuniga’s conclusory contention the BIA
violated his due process rights by failing to adequately evaluate his claim. See
Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to prevail on due
process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --