Hugo Parga-Pedroza v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HUGO PARGA-PEDROZA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-70219
Agency No. A088-423-296
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 22, 2014**
Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Hugo Parga-Pedroza, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for protection under the
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
FILED
AUG 4 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, Silaya v.
Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for
review.
The record does not compel the finding that Parga-Pedroza demonstrated it
is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence
(including the concept of willful blindness) of a public official in Mexico. See id.
at 1073; see also 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18(a)(7) (“Acquiescence of a public official
requires that the public official, prior to the activity constituting torture, have
awareness of such activity and thereafter breach his or her legal responsibility to
intervene to prevent such activity.”). We reject Parga-Pedroza’s contention that
the agency failed to give “proper deference” to his credible testimony, or that it
failed to consider the entirety of the evidence. Thus, Parga-Pedroza’s CAT claim
fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
12-70219 2

-- 2 of 2 --