Francisco De Jesus Nataren Lara v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANCISCO DE JESUS NATAREN
LARA,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 20-72145
Agency No. A209-296-488
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.
Francisco de Jesus Nataren Lara, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his
application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention
* 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 18 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 20-72145
Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Conde Quevedo v.
Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Nataren Lara does not challenge the agency’s
determination that his proposed particular social group of “extorted Salvadoran
males who are returning with imputed wealth by gang members” is not cognizable.
See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not
specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).
We do not consider Nataren Lara’s claim based on his proposed particular
social group of “Salvadorans who actively protest against gangs and their
activities” because the BIA did not decide the issue, see Santiago-Rodriguez v.
Holder, 657 F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir. 2011) (review limited to the grounds relied on
by the BIA), and the BIA did not err in declining to consider the claim where it
was raised for the first time to the BIA, see Honcharov v. Barr, 924 F.3d 1293,
1297 (9th Cir. 2019) (BIA did not err in declining to consider argument raised for
the first time on appeal).
Thus, we deny the petition for review as to Nataren Lara’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Nataren Lara failed to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or

-- 2 of 3 --

3 20-72145
with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to El Salvador. See
Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009) (no likelihood of
torture).
We reject as unsupported by the record Nataren Lara’s contentions that the
agency ignored evidence or otherwise erred in its analysis of his claims.
Nataren Lara’s request for oral argument, raised in his opening brief, is
denied.
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the
mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --