Santos Domingo Vicente- Fuentes 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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SANTOS DOMINGO VICENTE-
FUENTES,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-71144
Agency No. A097-103-158
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Santos Domingo Vicente-Fuentes, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his
application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
FILED
SEP 24 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-71144 2
§ 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 for substantial evidence factual findings.
INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n.1 (1992). We deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Vicente-Fuentes failed
to establish eligibility for withholding of removal because he failed to establish
past persecution or a clear probability of persecution in Guatemala on account of a
protected ground. See id. at 482-84; see also Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940,
944-46 (9th Cir. 2007) (rejecting petitioner’s withholding of removal claim based
on membership in a particular social group). Accordingly, Vicente-Fuentes’s
withholding of removal claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --