From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Aguilar-Rodriguez v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 13, 2014
No. 12-73020 (9th Cir. May. 13, 2014)

Opinion

No. 12-73020 Agency No. A200-289-337

05-13-2014

MARCOS ANTONIO AGUILAR-RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Before: CLIFTON, BEA and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Marcos Antonio Aguilar-Rodriguez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying his application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We review for substantial evidence factual findings, and review de novo questions of law. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny in part and grant in part, the petition for review and we remand.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA's denial of CAT relief because Aguilar-Rodriguez failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured with the consent or acquiescence of the Salvadoran government. See Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 747-48 (9th Cir. 2008).

The agency determined Aguilar-Rodriguez had not met the nexus requirement for withholding of removal. When the IJ and BIA issued their decisions they did not have the benefit of either this court's decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), and Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013), or the BIA's decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Thus, we grant the petition as to Aguilar-Rodriguez's withholding of removal claim, and remand to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).

Each party shall bear their own costs for this petition for review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part; and REMANDED.


Summaries of

Aguilar-Rodriguez v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 13, 2014
No. 12-73020 (9th Cir. May. 13, 2014)
Case details for

Aguilar-Rodriguez v. Holder

Case Details

Full title:MARCOS ANTONIO AGUILAR-RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr.…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 13, 2014

Citations

No. 12-73020 (9th Cir. May. 13, 2014)

Citing Cases

Aguilar-Aguilar v. Lynch

In all twelve of these cases—and unlike in Aguilar-Aguilar's case—the BIA had issued a decision before either…