SANDRA RESPRETO-PEREZ V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 11-73946 (9th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAN 24 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS SANDRA RESPRETO-PEREZ, Petitioner, No. 11-73946 Agency No. A077-999-746 v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted January 21, 2014** Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. Sandra Respreto-Perez, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying her application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). for substantial evidence factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency s finding that, even if she established membership in a particular social group, Respreto-Perez failed to qualify for asylum or withholding of removal because she did not show that the government of Colombia was unable or unwilling to protect her. See Nahrvani v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2005) (record did not compel conclusion that government was unable or unwilling to control the perpetrators of the harm). Accordingly, Respreto-Perez s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Zehatye, 453 F.3d at 1190. In light of our conclusion, we need not address Respreto-Perez s contention regarding the agency s asylum time-bar finding. Further, we reject RespretoPerez s contention that the agency ignored her sister s testimony, because she has not rebutted the presumption that the agency considered the entire record. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2006). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 11-73946

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.