Dora Elizabeth Rivas-De Leiva; 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 finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
KN/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DORA ELIZABETH RIVAS-DE LEIVA;
et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73181
Agency Nos. A096-180-686
A096-180-687
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Dora Elizabeth Rivas-De Leiva and her son, are natives and citizens of El
Salvador, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order
affirming an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum,
FILED
DEC 14 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

KN/Research 07-73181 2
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 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 determination of the governing
statutes and regulations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004).
We review factual findings for substantial evidence. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453
F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
We reject petitioners’ claim that they are eligible for asylum and
withholding of removal based on Reivas-De Leiva’s membership in a particular
social group, namely, young El Salvadorean women opposed to gangs. See
Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-55 (9th Cir. 2009) (rejecting as a particular
social group “young males in Guatemala who are targeted for gang recruitment but
refuse because they disagree with the gang’s criminal activities”); Santos-Lemus v.
Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008) (rejecting as a particular social
group “young men in El Salvador resisting gang violence”) (internal quotation
omitted). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that petitioners failed
to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of political
opinion or imputed political opinion. See Santos-Lemus, 542 F.3d at 747. Because
petitioners failed to demonstrate the harm they fear will be on account of a

-- 2 of 3 --

KN/Research 07-73181 3
protected ground, we deny the petition as to their asylum and withholding of
removal claims. See Barrios, 581 F.3d at 856.
Petitioners do not raise any arguments in their opening brief regarding the
agency’s denial of their CAT claim. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256,
1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not supported by argument are deemed waived).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --