Sebastian Hurtado Hernandez v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SEBASTIAN HURTADO HERNANDEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 20-72346
Agency No. A213-080-879
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 12, 2021**
Before: TALLMAN, RAWLINSON, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.
Sebastian Hurtado Hernandez, a native of Guatemala and citizen of Mexico,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
* 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
OCT 14 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 20-72346
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
the agency’s factual findings. Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th
Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Hurtado Hernandez does not challenge the agency’s
dispositive determination that his asylum application was untimely and he failed to
establish an exception to the one-year deadline. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706
F.3d 1072, 1079-1080 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in
a party’s opening brief are waived). Thus, Hurtado Hernandez’s asylum claim
fails.
Hurtado Hernandez also does not raise any argument challenging, and
therefore waives, the agency’s dispositive determinations that his proposed social
group of returnees with perceived wealth is not cognizable and that he otherwise
failed to establish nexus to a protected ground. See id. Thus, Hurtado Hernandez’s
withholding of removal claim also fails.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Hurtado Hernandez failed to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured
by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico.
See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

-- 2 of 3 --

3 20-72346
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the
mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --