Miguel Angel Ramirez-Figueroa v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States

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).
The Honorable Irma E. Gonzalez, District Judge for the U.S. District***
Court for Southern California, sitting by designation.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MIGUEL ANGEL RAMIREZ-FIGUEROA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of
the United States,
Respondent.
No. 10-71459
Agency No. A099-625-469
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 5, 2012**
Pasadena, California
Before: D.W. NELSON and O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges, and GONZALEZ,
District Judge.***
FILED
NOV 09 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

Miguel Angel Ramirez-Figueroa, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (the “Board”) order
denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under
the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. §
1252, review for substantial evidence, Castro-Martinez v. Holder, 674 F.3d 1073,
1080 (9th Cir. 2011), and deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the Board’s determination that Ramirez-
Figueroa failed to demonstrate that the government of El Salvador was unable or
unwilling to protect him from gangs. See id.
Because he failed to establish eligibility for asylum, Ramirez-Figueroa
necessarily failed to establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See
Pedro-Mateo v. INS, 224 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir. 2000). Ramirez-Figueroa’s
failure to distinctly raise the BIA’s denial of CAT relief waives any challenge
thereto. See Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 856 n.6 (9th Cir. 2009)
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --