Hugo Alexander Perez- Escobar v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HUGO ALEXANDER PEREZ-
ESCOBAR,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73624
Agency No. A099-663-573
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Hugo Alexander Perez-Escobar, 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 denial of his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
FILED
JUL 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73624 2
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n.1 (1992), and we deny the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of asylum and withholding of
removal because Perez-Escobar did not demonstrate that he was or would be
targeted by gang members on account of his political opinion, membership in a
particular social group or any other protected ground. See id. at 482-84; see also
Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740-41 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[t]he Real ID Act
requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum
applicant’s persecution”). Further, because Perez-Escobar’s family members
remain in El Salvador unharmed, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s
conclusion that he has not demonstrated a well-founded fear based on family
membership. See Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 743-44 (9th Cir. 2008).
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because
Perez-Escobar failed to demonstrate it is more likely than not he will be tortured in
El Salvador. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --