Geris Shawan 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
GERIS SHAWAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73427
Agency No. A076-705-945
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Geris Shawan, a native and citizen of Israel, petitions for review of a Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for withholding of removal. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. This court reviews de novo questions of
FILED
SEP 30 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-73427 2
law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except to the extent
that deference is owed to the BIA’s determination of the governing statutes and
regulations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). This court
reviews factual findings for substantial evidence. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d
1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
We reject Shawan’s claim that he faces a clear probability of persecution on
account of either his political opinion, see Soriano v. Holder, 569 F.3d 1162, 1164-
65 (9th Cir. 2009) (fear of harm was not on account of political opinion where
criminals were motivated to harm petitioner to retaliate for informing on them), or
his membership in a particular social group, see id. at 1166 (rejecting “government
informants” as a particular social group). Further, substantial evidence supports
the IJ’s determination that Shawan failed to demonstrate the Israeli government
would be unable or unwilling to control the individuals who threatened to harm
him. See Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 1069, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005).
Accordingly, Shawan’s withholding of removal claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --