Maria Cruz-Pineda; Jhonatan Martin Rodriguez-Cruz v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIA CRUZ-PINEDA; JHONATAN
MARTIN RODRIGUEZ-CRUZ,
Petitioners,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 16-72375
Agency Nos. A202-027-802
A202-027-803
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 17, 2019**
Pasadena, California
Before: NGUYEN and OWENS, Circuit Judges, and VITALIANO,*** District
Judge.
Maria Cruz-Pineda and her minor son—whose claim is derivative of his
mother’s—are natives and citizens of El Salvador. They seek review of the Board
* 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).
*** The Honorable Eric N. Vitaliano, United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation.
FILED
OCT 21 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) final removal order, dismissing their appeal from
the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) decision denying them asylum and withholding of
removal. Cruz did not appeal the IJ’s denial of protection under the Convention
Against Torture to the BIA; therefore, to the extent Cruz raises it now, this court
does not have jurisdiction to review the IJ’s denial of relief on this basis. See 8
U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (this court may review final orders of removal “only if” the
alien has exhausted “all administrative remedies”). As the parties are familiar with
the facts, we do not recount them here. We deny the petition.
The BIA properly affirmed the IJ’s denial of relief on adverse credibility
grounds. See Joseph v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1235, 1240 (9th Cir. 2010) (stating the
standard of review). The BIA and IJ cited “specific and cogent reasons” for
finding Cruz not credible. Manes v. Sessions, 875 F.3d 1261, 1263 (9th Cir. 2017)
(per curiam). For example, the BIA and IJ identified “significant inconsistencies
in [Cruz’s] testimony related to the alleged threats made by gang members,”
including which gang targeted her family and what they demanded. Substantial
evidence supports the grounds relied on by the BIA to affirm the IJ’s adverse
credibility determination.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --