Yeimi Anavei Adriano-Cerna v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YEIMI ANAVEI ADRIANO-CERNA,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 22-838
Agency No.
A208-302-873
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 14, 2023**
Phoenix, Arizona
Before: GOULD, HURWITZ, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.
Yeimi Anavei Adriano-Cerna is a native and citizen of Honduras. She
petitions for review of a Bureau of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision
dismissing an appeal from the order of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying her
applications for asylum, for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under
* 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
SEP 19 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 22-838
the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction to review the BIA
decision under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
We review findings of fact for substantial evidence and uphold the agency’s
decision “unless the evidence compels a contrary result.” Budiono v. Lynch, 837
F.3d 1042, 1046 (9th Cir. 2016) (internal quotation and citation omitted). Where,
as here, the BIA adopts and affirms “the IJ’s decision without adding any
commentary of its own, we treat the IJ’s decision as that of the BIA.” Sinha v.
Holder, 564 F.3d 1015, 1019–20 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.
1. An applicant for asylum and withholding of removal must show either
that past persecution was “committed by the government or forces the government
is either unable or unwilling to control,” or that future persecution will be
committed by those actors. J.R. v. Barr, 975 F.3d 778, 782 (9th Cir. 2020)
(quoting Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 655–56 (9th Cir. 2000)). Substantial
evidence supports the BIA’s holding that Adriano-Cerna did not show sufficient
government involvement in the past persecution that she suffered and did not
establish a reasonable probability of future persecution with government
involvement.
Adriano-Cerna fears returning to Honduras because she reported her father
to the police for raping her sisters and her niece, and he made threats against her

-- 2 of 3 --

3 22-838
because of her actions. However, the police responded within 30 minutes when
she reported the crime, her father was prosecuted, and is currently in prison. That
does not show inability or unwillingness to fight against the crimes that she claims
were persecution of her.
Adriano-Cerna also asserts that she fears returning to Honduras because the
father of her children physically and verbally abused her and threatened her life.
But she never reported the abuse to the police. The BIA did not err in holding that
there was no evidence in the record to indicate that the Honduras government
would be “unable or unwilling to” respond to domestic violence against her.
2. The IJ denied Adriano-Cerna’s CAT claim because she did not show a
likelihood of torture. Adriano-Cerna’s petition for review does not challenge that
finding and we therefore find no error in the agency determination. See Martinez-
Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996).
PETITION DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --