MIRNA RODRIGUEZ-ROJA V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 09-71637 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED MAR 06 2012 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MIRNA RODRIGUEZ-ROJA, a.k.a. Maria Dolores Rodriguez, a.k.a. Mirna Rodriguez Rojas, No. 09-71637 Agency No. A098-435-842 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM * v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 21, 2012 ** Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Mirna Rodriguez-Roja, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding * 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). of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture ( CAT ). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except to the extent that deference is owed to the BIA s determination of the governing statutes and regulations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We review for substantial evidence factual findings. Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review. Rodriguez-Roja testified gang members attacked her and demanded money because they knew she had relatives in the United States. Substantial evidence supports the agency s determination that Rodriguez-Roja failed to demonstrate that she is eligible for asylum and withholding of removal based on her membership in a particular social group. See Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1151-52 (9th Cir. 2010); see also Barrios, 581 F.3d at 856 (evidence supported conclusion that gang victimized the petitioner for economic and personal reasons rather than on account of a protected ground). Accordingly, Rodriguez-Roja s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. Substantial evidence also supports the agency s denial of Rodriguez-Roja s CAT claim because she failed to establish a likelihood of torture by or with the 2 09-71637 consent or acquiescence of a government official if returned to El Salvador. See Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir. 2007). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 09-71637

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.