Vera, et al v. Holder, No. 07-71936 (9th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 31 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUAN CARLOS VERA, Petitioner, No. 07-71936 Agency No. A097-306-266 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted March 17, 2011 San Francisco, California Before: WALLACE, FERNANDEZ, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges. Juan Carlos Vera petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. ยง 1252, and we deny Vera s petition. Substantial evidence supports that Board s conclusion that Vera was not targeted on account of a protected ground. See Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. 1018 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that the Board s decision must be affirmed unless the applicant shows that the evidence compels the conclusion that the asylum decision was incorrect ). Here, the record indicates that Vera was threatened by police in Argentina for seeking redress for an attack (rape) upon his brother. Thus, Vera fears harm because of a personal matter between him and a few rogue police officers not based on a protected ground. See Molina-Morales v. I.N.S., 237 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir. 2001). Additionally, the severity of harm that Vera experienced in Argentina including his brief detention, an isolated threat from police, and a single incident of physical mistreatment does not compel the conclusion that Vera was subjected to past persecution. See Prasad v. I.N.S., 47 F.3d 336, 339 (9th Cir. 1995) (holding that an applicant who was hit and kicked while being briefly detained did not compel a finding of persecution). Only in extreme cases involving repeated and especially menacing death threats have we held such threats to establish past persecution. See Lim v. I.N.S., 224 F.3d 929, 936 (9th Cir. 2000). We also conclude that Vera s due process claim lacks merit. There is no evidence suggesting that the immigration judge abandoned her role as a neutral adjudicator. See Reyes-Melendez v. I.N.S., 342 F.3d 1001, 1007 (9th Cir. 2003). Instead, the record indicates that Vera had a reasonable opportunity to present his case and that he received the full and fair hearing to which he was entitled. See Sanchez-Cruz v. I.N.S., 255 F.3d 775, 779 (9th Cir. 2001). To the extent that Vera seeks due process relief on the basis that his brother was granted asylum, it is clear that his brother s case involves circumstances materially different from those at issue here. See Wang v. Ashcroft, 341 F.3d 1015, 1019 n.2 (9th Cir. 2003) (indicating that our immigration system should not permit inconsistent treatment of family members that assert claims based on identical facts). PETITION DENIED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
