Reyes-Velazquez, et al v. Holder, No. 08-70738 (9th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAN 21 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS MARIA DE LAS NIEVES REYESVELAZQUEZ, No. 08-70738 Agency No. A097-351-250 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM * v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted January 10, 2010 ** Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Maria de las Nieves Reyes-Velazquez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying her applications for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture * 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). ( CAT ). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review. Reyes-Velazquez was not threatened or harmed in Mexico by anyone, and she has not established that her brother-in-law s political opponents have imputed or are likely to impute a political opinion to her. See Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d 1482, 1489-90 (9th Cir. 1997). Further, Reyes-Velazquez has not established that the incidents her brother and uncle experienced had any connection to her, see Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1060 (9th Cir. 2009), or that they occurred on account of a protected ground, see Gormley v.Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1176-77 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the agency s finding that Reyes-Velazquez failed to establish a clear probability of persecution on account of an imputed political opinion or her membership in a particular social group. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1166, 1170-72 (9th Cir. 2005). Reyes-Velazquez has not made any argument regarding the agency s denial of CAT relief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party s opening brief are waived). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 08-70738

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.