LUCIANA TELLO-SANCHEZ V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 13-71756 (9th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MAY 22 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS LUCIANA TELLO-SANCHEZ; ESTEBAN REYES-FLORES, No. 13-71756 Agency Nos. A088-737-890 A088-737-891 Petitioners, v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted May 13, 2014** Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Luciana Tello-Sanchez and Esteban Reyes-Flores, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying their applications for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against * 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). Torture ( CAT ). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 118485 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the BIA s finding that petitioners failed to establish that they suffered harm or have a fear of future harm on account of a protected ground, as opposed to a personal dispute over land. See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009) (the REAL ID Act requires that a protected ground represent one central reason for an asylum applicant s persecution ); see also Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010). Because the record supports the BIA s finding that, even assuming indigenous landowners are a particular social group, petitioners failed to establish a nexus between the harm they experienced and their membership in that group, remand in light of Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013) and Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), is unnecessary. We lack jurisdiction to consider petitioners unexhausted claim that Tello-Sanchez is a member of a particular social group consisting of police informants. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004). In the absence of a nexus to a protected ground, petitioners withholding of removal claims fail. 2 13-71756 Finally, substantial evidence also supports the BIA s denial of CAT relief because petitioners failed to establish a likelihood of torture if they return to Mexico. See Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100, 1113 (9th Cir. 2006). Because petitioners have not shown a likelihood of torture, we reject petitioners request to remand in light of Madrigal v. Holder, 716 F.3d 499 (9th Cir. 2013). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 3 13-71756

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.