Jose Rodriguez Lopez v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE RODRIGUEZ LOPEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-71753
Agency No. A070-744-010
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 14, 2015**
Before: SILVERMAN, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Jose Rodriguez Lopez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal
and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
FILED
OCT 20 2015
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 --

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir.
2006). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of withholding of removal
because Rodriguez Lopez failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be
persecuted in Mexico by police or drug cartel members. See Nagoulko v. INS, 333
F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (fear of future harm too speculative); see also
Hakeem v. INS, 273 F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir. 2001) (claim of future persecution
weakened when similarly-situated family members continue to live in the country
without incident), superseded by statute on other grounds. Thus, we deny
Rodriguez Lopez’s petition as to his withholding of removal claim.
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because
Rodriguez Lopez failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or
with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See
Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). Thus, we deny Rodriguez
Lopez’s petition as to his CAT claim.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-71753 2

-- 2 of 2 --