Obdulio Noe Lopez Merida v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
OBDULIO NOE LOPEZ MERIDA,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-72006
Agency No. A070-552-090
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Obdulio Noe Lopez Merida, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro
se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and
withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
NOV 24 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 2 --

for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, 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 Lopez Merida
failed to demonstrate that he suffered past persecution or had a well-founded fear
of future persecution on account of a protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias,
502 U.S. 478, 483 (1992) (petitioner must provide “some evidence” of the
persecutor’s motive, direct or circumstantial) (emphasis in original). We reject
Lopez Merida’s contention that the agency applied an incorrect legal standard.
Thus, Lopez Merida’s asylum claim fails.
Because Lopez Merida failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he
necessarily failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal.
See Zehatye, 453 F.3d at 1190.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-72006 2

-- 2 of 2 --