Daniel De Jesus Guerra- Regalado v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DANIEL DE JESUS GUERRA-
REGALADO,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-72191
Agency No. A088-448-871
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 13, 2015**
Before: LEAVY, CALLAHAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Daniel De Jesus Guerra-Regalado, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
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 protection under the Convention Against Torture
FILED
MAY 21 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 3 --

(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence the agency’s factual findings, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056
(9th Cir. 2009), and we deny the petition for review.
In support of his withholding of removal claim, Guerra-Regalado argued to
the agency that he established past persecution and a fear of future persecution
from gangs on account of his membership in three particular social groups, all
related to Guerra-Regalado’s familial ties to his gang-member uncle. The record
does not compel the conclusion that Guerra-Regalado established past persecution
or a clear probability of future persecution on account of his membership in any of
these three social groups. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir.
2010) (“An alien’s desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by
theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected
ground.”); see also Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009)
(“[t]he Real ID Act requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central reason’
for an asylum applicant's persecution”). Thus, Guerra-Regalado’s withholding of
removal claim fails.
Guerra-Regalado does not make any arguments challenging the agency’s
denial of his CAT claim. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th
12-72191 2

-- 2 of 3 --

Cir. 1996) (“Issues raised in a brief that are not supported by argument are deemed
abandoned.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
12-72191 3

-- 3 of 3 --