Jose Luis Mazariegos-Delgado 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).
KY/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE LUIS MAZARIEGOS-DELGADO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-75029
Agency No. A076-341-964
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010**
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Jose Luis Mazariegos-Delgado, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,
FILED
JAN 21 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

KY/Research 06-75029 2
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
Our jurisdiction is governed under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n.1 (1992), and we dismiss in
part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review Mazariegos-Delgado’s contention that he
qualifies for humanitarian asylum because he failed to exhaust this claim before the
agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Mazariegos-Delgado
did not show that his problems with Rudy Vega and his family, or Mazariegos-
Delgado’s problems with the political party, Union de Centro Nacional, established
past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a
protected ground. See Cruz-Navarro v. INS, 232 F.3d 1024, 1028-30 (9th Cir.
2000); Molina-Morales v. INS, 237 F.3d 1048, 1051-52 (9th Cir. 2001) (personal
retribution is not persecution on account of a protected ground).
Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s determination that, even though
Mazariegos-Delgado suffered past persecution by the Guatemalan police on
account of his imputed political opinion, the presumption of a well-founded fear of
future persecution had been rebutted due to the change in circumstances. See Sowe
v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1281, 1285-86 (9th Cir. 2008) (agency rationally construed

-- 2 of 3 --

KY/Research 06-75029 3
evidence in the record and provided a sufficiently individualized analysis of the
petitioner’s situation). Moreover, Mazariegos-Delgado’s well-founded fear is
further undermined because his family remains unharmed in Guatemala. See Gu v.
Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1022 (9th Cir. 2006). Therefore, Mazariegos-Delgado’s
asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d
849, 856 (9th Cir. 2009)
Finally, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that
Mazariegos-Delgado is not entitled to CAT protection because he failed to
demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured if returned to
Guatemala. See Hasan v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 1114, 1122-23 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

-- 3 of 3 --