RAUL FIGUEROA POSADAS V. LORETTA E. LYNCH, No. 11-73698 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 03 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RAUL FIGUEROA POSADAS, AKA Kenny W. Blouch, No. 11-73698 Agency No. A201-157-085 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM* v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted July 21, 2015** Before: CANBY, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Raul Figueroa Posadas, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have * 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). jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review. The record does not compel the conclusion that Posadas established changed circumstances to excuse his untimely asylum application. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(4); see also Ramadan v. Gonzalez, 479 F.3d 646, 656-58 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam). Thus, we deny Posadas’ petition as to his asylum claim. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Posadas did not establish it is more likely than not he will be persecuted on account of a protected ground if returned to El Salvador. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (petitioner’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”); see also 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”). Thus, we deny the petition as to Posadas’ withholding of removal claim. Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Posadas failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Salvadoran government if returned to El Salvador. 2 11-73698 See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). Thus, we deny the petition as to Posadas’ CAT claim. Finally, in light of respondent’s opposition, we deny Posadas’ motion for an extension of time to notify the court of a possible procedural resolution. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 11-73698
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.
