Jose Noe Garcia-Monge 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 concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
JT/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE NOE GARCIA-MONGE,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-72450
Agency No. A078-942-618
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Jose Noe Garcia-Monge, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
FILED
FEB 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

JT/Research 07-72450 2
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, INS v.
Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992), and we deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Garcia-Monge
failed to establish the severe hazing he suffered at school was on account of his
political opinion or any other protected ground. See id. at 483-84. Accordingly,
his asylum claim fails.
Because Garcia-Monge failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he
necessarily failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal.
See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
because Garcia-Monge did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the
instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran
government. See Azanor v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1013, 1019 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --