Rafael Alejandro Abarca Mercado v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAFAEL ALEJANDRO ABARCA
MERCADO,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 17-70373
Agency No. A200-248-479
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Rafael Alejandro Abarca Mercado, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) order dismissing
his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
FEB 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 17-70373
asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against
Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d
1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
We reject, as without merit, Mercado’s argument that the IJ erred in finding
him removable, where Mercado conceded the allegations and the charge that he did
not have a valid entry document at the time he sought entry to the United States
and does not dispute these concessions on appeal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(i)(I).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Mercado
failed to demonstrate a nexus between the harm he suffered and fears and a
protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010)
(desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random
violence by gang members has no nexus to a protected ground). Thus, in the
absence of nexus to a protected ground, Mercado’s asylum and withholding of
removal claims fail. See id.at 1015-16.
Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Mercado’s
CAT claim because he has not shown it is more likely than not he would be
tortured by the government of Mexico or with its consent or acquiescence. See

-- 2 of 3 --

3 17-70373
Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --