JOSE ROSALES V. MATTHEW WHITAKER, No. 15-73136 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 20 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOSE LUIS ROSALES, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 15-73136 Agency No. A073-977-168 v. MEMORANDUM* MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted October 17, 2018 San Francisco, California Before: HAWKINS and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and EATON,** Judge. Jose Luis Rosales (“Rosales”), a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), dismissing his appeal from an order of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”), denying his application for protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** Richard K. Eaton, Judge of the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and deny the petition. 1. The BIA substantially relied upon the opinion of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) when denying CAT protection to Rosales. “Where, as here, the BIA adopts the decision of the IJ, we review the IJ’s decision as if it were that of the BIA.” Hoque v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1190, 1194 (9th Cir. 2004). 2. The CAT provides protection to aliens who prove that they are more likely than not to be tortured if they are removed to the proposed country of removal. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2). Here, substantial evidence supported the IJ’s finding— which was adopted by the BIA—that Rosales did not show that he is more likely than not to be tortured if he is removed to El Salvador. Rosales had never been tortured or threatened with torture in El Salvador, nor did he submit evidence compelling the conclusion that he was likely to be subject to future torture in that country. DENIED. 2
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.
