Mirna Rodriguez-Roja, a.k.a. Maria Dolores Rodriguez, a.k.a. Mirna Rodriguez Rojas 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MIRNA RODRIGUEZ-ROJA, a.k.a.
Maria Dolores Rodriguez, a.k.a. Mirna
Rodriguez Rojas,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-71637
Agency No. A098-435-842
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 21, 2012**
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Mirna Rodriguez-Roja, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from
an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding
FILED
MAR 06 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

09-71637 2
of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of 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). We review
for substantial evidence factual findings. Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854
(9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.
Rodriguez-Roja testified gang members attacked her and demanded money
because they knew she had relatives in the United States. Substantial evidence
supports the agency’s determination that Rodriguez-Roja failed to demonstrate that
she is eligible for asylum and withholding of removal based on her membership in
a particular social group. See Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1151-52
(9th Cir. 2010); see also Barrios, 581 F.3d at 856 (evidence supported conclusion
that gang victimized the petitioner for economic and personal reasons rather than
on account of a protected ground). Accordingly, Rodriguez-Roja’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Rodriguez-Roja’s
CAT claim because she failed to establish a likelihood of torture by or with the

-- 2 of 3 --

09-71637 3
consent or acquiescence of a government official if returned to El Salvador. See
Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir. 2007).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --