Opinion
20-72395
10-21-2022
EDUARDO ANTONIO NERIO-GUARDADO, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Submitted October 19, 2022 Pasadena, California
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A208-279-114
Before: WATFORD and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and VITALIANO, District Judge.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
MEMORANDUM
Eduardo Antonio Nerio-Guardado petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's order denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We deny the petition.
1. Substantial evidence supports the agency's no-nexus finding. "To prevail on an asylum claim, an applicant must . . . demonstrate that the persecution was 'on account of' a statutorily protected ground." Aden v. Wilkinson, 989 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir. 2021). Nerio-Guardado claims that he is eligible for asylum and withholding of removal based on his membership in a particular social group ("PSG") consisting of "family members of victims targeted by gangs." The agency determined that the harm Nerio-Guardado suffered in the past and his fear of future persecution were not based on membership in this PSG. The record does not compel a contrary conclusion. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). Nerio-Guardado testified that he believed gang members targeted him in 2014 because he "live[d] in a neighborhood that is their rival" and more recently for money or possibly for recruitment purposes. Beyond those reasons, Nerio-Guardado testified that he had "no idea" why he was targeted. While gang members also extorted his father and killed his cousin, Nerio-Guardado did not establish that these events related to his own mistreatment.
Because the no-nexus finding is a sufficient basis for the agency's denial of Nerio-Guardado's asylum and withholding claims, we do not reach his other challenges to the agency's decision denying these claims.
2. Substantial evidence also supports the agency's determination that Nerio-Guardado is not entitled to protection under CAT. For a successful CAT claim, the applicant must show that it is more likely than not he would be tortured upon return to his homeland with the consent or acquiescence of the government. See Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1033 (9th Cir. 2014). Although Nerio-Guardado asserted that El Salvador suffers from a general inability to protect its citizens and alleged several specific incidents of corruption, he did not present particularized evidence that public officials will be willfully blind to or unwilling to oppose his torture. See Kaur v. Garland, 2 F.4th 823, 837 (9th Cir. 2021). In fact, Nerio-Guardado testified that soldiers arrested a gang member who conveyed threats to his grandmother approximately two weeks before he left his country. The record therefore does not compel the conclusion that Nerio-Guardado established the state action necessary for CAT relief. See Cole v. Holder, 659 F.3d 762, 770 (9th Cir. 2011).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
The Honorable Eric N. Vitaliano, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation.