Nora Hilda Martinez-Linares 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. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NORA HILDA MARTINEZ-LINARES,
et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74220
Agency Nos. A078-959-542
A098-428-979
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Nora Hilda Martinez-Linares and her son, natives and citizens of El
Salvador, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order
dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their
FILED
DEC 22 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8
U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings.
See Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for
review.
The record does not compel the conclusion that changed or extraordinary
circumstances excused the untimely filing of Martinez-Linares’ asylum
application. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(4), (5); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646,
656–58 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam). We therefore uphold the agency’s denial of
her asylum claim.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Martinez-Linares
failed to demonstrate a clear probability that her “life or freedom would be
threatened” upon her return to El Salvador. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b); Al-Harbi v.
INS, 242 F.3d 882, 888–89 (9th Cir. 2001). We therefore uphold the agency’s
denial of withholding of removal.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --