Opinion
Argued and Submitted September 10, 2001.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
Alien petitioned for judicial review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his application for asylum, and withholding of deportation. The Court of Appeals held that alien did not show past persecution he suffered was linked to the government of his native country, as required to establish well-founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.
Petitioned denied.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Before REINHARDT, HAWKINS and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Substantial evidence supports the Board of Immigration Appeals' determination that Petitioner Jose Medina's fear of persecution was not on account of a political opinion. Medina failed to link his persecutors to the Peruvian government. See Canas-Segovia v. INS, 970 F.2d 599, 601 (9th Cir.1992). It was equally likely that Medina was being threatened as a result of an ongoing business feud with his uncle.
Since Medina failed to show that he had a well-founded fear of persecution on account of a political opinion, "we [ ] need to proceed no further because a fortiori ", Medina fails to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of deportation.
Page 749.
DeValle v. INS, 901 F.2d 787, 789 (9th Cir.1990).
PETITION DENIED.