ABRAHAM MENDEZ PAREDES, AKA Alberto Garcia Valenzuela, AKA Abraham Mendez-Pacheco,… v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ABRAHAM MENDEZ PAREDES, AKA
Alberto Garcia Valenzuela, AKA Abraham
Mendez-Pacheco, AKA Abraham Mendez-
Pacheo, AKA Ezequiel Romero Suentes,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-70030
Agency No. A205-408-803
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 12, 2019**
Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Abraham Mendez Paredes, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for relief under the
* 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
MAR 15 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We deny the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Mendez Paredes fails to challenge the agency’s
determination that he did not establish that it is more likely than not that he would
be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of Mexico.
See Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to
contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver). Thus, Mendez Paredes’s CAT
claim fails.
In light of this disposition, we need not reach Mendez Paredes’s contentions
regarding credibility. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004)
(“As a general rule courts . . . are not required to make findings on issues the
decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach.”) (citation omitted).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --