Jiansheng Cao 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JIANSHENG CAO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-73011
Agency No. A099-398-448
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Jiansheng Cao, a native and citizen of China, 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 removal, and
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is
FILED
JAN 26 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-73011
governed by under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings and review de novo its legal conclusions. Santos-Lemus
v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in
part the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that even if
credible, Cao did not establish that the Chinese police targeted him on account of a
protected ground. See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740-41 (9th Cir.
2009) (“[t]he Real ID Act requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central
reason’ for an asylum applicant’s persecution”). Thus, his asylum claim fails.
The agency determined that Cao waived his withholding of removal and
CAT claims by failing to meaningfully challenge them. Cao does not challenge
this determination.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --