Victoriano Ixcoy-Itzep v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VICTORIANO IXCOY-ITZEP,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 19-71146
Agency No. A070-567-757
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Immigration Judge
Submitted December 11, 2019**
Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Victoriano Ixcoy-Itzep, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for
review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) determination under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(a)
that he did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Guatemala and
thus is not entitled to relief from his reinstated removal order. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s
* 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
DEC 16 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 19-71146
factual findings. Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 829, 836 (9th Cir. 2016). We
deny the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Ixcoy-Itzep does not challenge the IJ’s determination
that he failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of persecution on account of a
protected ground. See Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 n.5 (9th
Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver).
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Ixcoy-Itzep failed
to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of torture by or with the consent or
acquiescence of the government if returned to Guatemala. See Andrade-Garcia,
828 F.3d at 836-37.
Ixcoy-Itzep’s opposed motion for a stay of removal (Docket Entry No. 5) is
denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal will terminate upon issuance of
the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --