Rosa Guillermina Blanco v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

10-73814Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit16 avr. 2015

Texte intégral

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROSA GUILLERMINA BLANCO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-73814
Agency No. A088-965-787
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 7, 2015**
Before: FISHER, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Rosa Guillermina Blanco, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for withholding of
removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
FILED
APR 16 2015
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).

-- 1 of 2 --

evidence the agency’s factual findings. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182,
1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
Blanco does not challenge the BIA’s finding that she did not establish past
persecution. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Blanco failed to
establish that a protected ground, including membership in a social group or a
political opinion, would be a central reason for her being targeted. See
Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009) (the REAL ID Act
“requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum
applicant’s persecution”); see also Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir.
2010) (“An [applicant’s] desire to be free from . . . random violence by gang
members bears no nexus to a protected ground.”). In light of our conclusion, we
need not reach Blanco’s other contentions regarding withholding of removal.
Thus, her withholding of removal claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
10-73814 2

-- 2 of 2 --

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.