Gagik Gabrielyan; Marine Grigoryan 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
GAGIK GABRIELYAN;
MARINE GRIGORYAN,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-70693
Agency Nos. A079-537-433
A079-537-434
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 16, 2010**
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Gagik Gabrielyan and Marine Grigoryan, natives and citizens of Armenia,
petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing
their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for
asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture
FILED
NOV 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

06-70693 2
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence factual findings. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 & n.1 (1992).
We deny the petition for review.
Gabrielyan testified the police questioned him about documents and thought
he had information about an assassination attempt. Substantial evidence supports
the agency’s finding that the police harassed Gabrielyan as part of a legitimate
criminal investigation and not on account of his membership in a particular social
group, an imputed political opinion, or any other protected ground. See Dinu v.
Ashcroft, 372 F.3d 1041, 1045 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, his asylum claim
fails. See id.
Because Gabrielyan failed to meet the lower burden of proof for asylum, it
follows that he has not met the higher standard for withholding of removal. See
Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because
Gabrielyan failed to establish that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured
if returned to Armenia. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir.
2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --