Rene Edgardo Andres-Cruz; v. MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RENE EDGARDO ANDRES-CRUZ; et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting
Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-70162
Agency Nos. A208-377-914
A208-377-915
A208-373-976
A208-373-977
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 15, 2019**
Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Rene Edgardo Andres-Cruz and his family, natives and citizens of El
Salvador, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their
application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JAN 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 18-70162
Against Torture. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de
novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008),
except to the extent that deference is owed to the BIA’s interpretation of the
governing statutes and regulations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th
Cir. 2004). We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings.
Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We dismiss in part
and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to consider petitioners’ proposed social group of
“former police officers” that they raise for the first time in their opening brief. See
Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004).
The agency did not err in finding that petitioners’ proposed social group of
“police officers in El Salvador targeted for harm by gangs” is not cognizable. See
Cruz-Navarro v. INS, 232 F.3d 1024, 1029-30 (9th Cir. 2000) (current status as a
police officer is not a cognizable protected group under the Immigration and
Nationality Act). Thus, petitioners’ asylum and withholding of removal claims
fail.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
petitioners failed to show it is more likely than not that they would be tortured by
or with the consent or acquiescence of the Salvadoran government. See Aden v.
Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

-- 2 of 3 --

3 18-70162
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

-- 3 of 3 --