From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Valdizon-Rivera v. Garland

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 14, 2022
No. 17-70456 (9th Cir. Oct. 14, 2022)

Opinion

17-70456

10-14-2022

WALTER ALEXANDER VALDIZON-RIVERA, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Submitted October 6, 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. A206-848-080

Before: LEE and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT, District Judge.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM

Walter Alexander Valdizon-Rivera petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's (IJ) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.

1. The BIA's mistaken reference to Mexico was a non-prejudicial scrivener's error. See Pardo v. Lynch, 637 Fed.Appx. 306, 307 (9th Cir. 2016) (stating that the BIA's reference to section 11379(a) of a statute, rather than section 11378 of the same statute, was "a scrivener's error and harmless"). The BIA's sole reference to Mexico was preceded and followed by references to Valdizon-Rivera being a citizen of El Salvador and his fearing a return to El Salvador. It is thus clear that the BIA was aware that El Salvador was Valdizon-Rivera's country of origin.

2. Substantial evidence supports the BIA's determination that Valdizon-Rivera is ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal because he failed to demonstrate a nexus between a past or feared harm and a protected ground. See Garcia v. Wilkinson, 988 F.3d 1136, 1143, 1146 (9th Cir. 2021). Valdizon-Rivera attempted to establish this nexus by claiming membership in two particular social groups (PSG). Because Valdizon-Rivera does not support with argument his claim that the PSG "witnesses to criminal activity" was not adequately addressed by the BIA, we deem the claim abandoned. Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996) ("Issues raised in a brief that are not supported by argument are deemed abandoned."). Valdizon-Rivera's second PSG, "Salvadorans and their family members who have resisted extortion demands by gangs," is not cognizable because it lacks social distinction. See Nguyen v. Barr, 983 F.3d 1099, 1103 (9th Cir. 2020) (stating that an applicant claiming membership in a PSG must establish that it is socially distinct). The sources that Valdizon-Rivera points to as support for his argument based on this PSG neither speak to the group's existence nor to the way it is perceived in Salvadoran society. Acevedo Granados v. Garland, 992 F.3d 755, 763 (9th Cir. 2021) (stating that a group is socially distinct if it is "perceived by the society in question to be 'sufficiently separate' from the rest of the society" (quoting Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. &N. Dec. 227, 241 (BIA 2014))).

3. We lack jurisdiction to consider Valdizon-Rivera's CAT relief claim because the single argument he raises in support of this claim on appeal was not raised before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (stating that this Court generally lacks jurisdiction to review unexhausted contentions). Even if we had jurisdiction to consider Valdizon-Rivera's CAT relief claim, we would reject it on the merits because substantial evidence supports the BIA's denial of this claim.

PETITION DENIED.

The Honorable Richard D. Bennett, United States District Judge for the District of Maryland, sitting by designation.


Summaries of

Valdizon-Rivera v. Garland

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 14, 2022
No. 17-70456 (9th Cir. Oct. 14, 2022)
Case details for

Valdizon-Rivera v. Garland

Case Details

Full title:WALTER ALEXANDER VALDIZON-RIVERA, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 14, 2022

Citations

No. 17-70456 (9th Cir. Oct. 14, 2022)