Agus Budi Santoso 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
AGUS BUDI SANTOSO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73839
Agency No. A098-511-208
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Agus Budi Santoso, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
FILED
JAN 24 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73839 2
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings,
Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the
petition for review.
Santoso does not contend he suffered past persecution, but contends he faces
future persecution based on his family’s disappointment that he is no longer a
practicing Muslim and general harm by Muslims. Substantial evidence supports
the agency’s finding that Santoso does not face a clear probability of future
persecution. See Fakhry v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1057, 1065-66 (9th Cir. 2008);
Lolong v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 1173, 1179 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc) (a “general,
undifferentiated claim” is not a basis for relief).
In addition, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
because Santoso failed to establish it is more likely than not that he will be tortured
if returned to Indonesia. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir.
2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --