Douglas Armando Linarez De Leon v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DOUGLAS ARMANDO LINAREZ DE
LEON,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-73835
Agency No. A072-542-775
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 9, 2014**
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Douglas Armando Linarez de Leon, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his
FILED
DEC 16 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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). Thus, we deny petitioner’s
request for oral argument.

-- 1 of 3 --

application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. §1252.
We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v.
Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny in part and grant in
part the petition for review, and we remand.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of Linarez de Leon’s CAT
claim because Linarez de Leon failed to show it is more likely than not he would
be tortured by the Guatemalan government, or with its consent or acquiescence.
See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). Thus, Linarez de
Leon’s CAT claim fails.
In denying Linarez de Leon’s asylum and withholding of removal claims,
the agency found Linarez de Leon failed to establish a nexus to a protected ground.
When the IJ and BIA issued their decisions in this case, they did not have the
benefit of this court’s decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th
Cir. 2013) (en banc), Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013), and Pirir-
Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2014), or the BIA’s decisions in Matter of
M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of W-G-R-,
09-73835 2

-- 2 of 3 --

26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Thus, we remand Linarez de Leon’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions.
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
In light of this remand, we do not reach Linarez de Leon’s remaining
challenges to the agency’s denial of his asylum and withholding of removal claims
at this time.
Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED IN PART;
REMANDED.
09-73835 3

-- 3 of 3 --