Osmin Mejia v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
OSMIN MEJIA,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-72998
Agency No. A088-359-600
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Osmin Mejia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
FILED
NOV 24 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 3 --

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir.
2009). We deny the petition for review.
Because Mejia filed his application more than one year after his arrival in
the United States, and did not show either “changed circumstances” materially
affecting his eligibility for asylum, or “extraordinary circumstances” excusing his
failure to file within the one-year deadline, his asylum claim is time-barred. See 8
C.F.R. § 208.4(a).
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Mejia is not eligible
for withholding of removal because he failed to establish a nexus between the
persecution he fears and a statutorily protected ground. See Parussimova v.
Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 741 (9th Cir. 2008) (“[T]o demonstrate that a protected
ground was at least once central reason for persecution, an applicant must prove
that such ground was a cause of the persecutors’ acts.”) (internal quotations
omitted); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“An alien’s desire
to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by
gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground.”)
Finally, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Mejia
did not establish that he would more likely than not face torture at the instigation
13-72998 2

-- 2 of 3 --

of, or with the acquiescence of the Salvadoran government. See Silaya v. Mukasey,
524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-72998 3

-- 3 of 3 --