Sok Heng Meas 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
SOK HENG MEAS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74471
Agency No. A096-066-350
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 21, 2012**
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Sok Heng Meas, a native and citizen of Cambodia, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
FILED
FEB 28 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

08-74471 2
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual
findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we
deny the petition for review.
The record supports the agency’s denial of Meas’s asylum application as
untimely based on the two-year delay between when Meas learned her husband
was arrested and when she filed her application. See Taslimi v. Holder, 590 F.3d
981, 984 (9th Cir. 2010) (the court has jurisdiction to consider whether an
application for asylum was filed within a reasonable time); Husyev v. Mukasey,
528 F.3d 1172, 1181-82 (9th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, Meas’s asylum claim fails.
Meas does not contend that she suffered past persecution. The record does
not compel the conclusion that Meas has a clear probability of future persecution
because there is no evidence that spouses of members of the Cambodian Freedom
Fighters (“CFF”) organization are targeted for persecution or that anyone is
targeting Meas because of her own involvement with CFF. See Fakhry v.
Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1057, 1065-66 (9th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, Meas’s
withholding of removal claim also fails.
Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
because Meas failed to establish it is more likely than not that she will be tortured

-- 2 of 3 --

08-74471 3
if returned to Cambodia. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir.
2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --