MOISES VELASQUEZ-MEDINA V. LORETTA E. LYNCH, No. 13-70281 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED OCT 26 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOISES VELASQUEZ-MEDINA, Petitioner, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 13-70281 Agency No. A088-892-353 v. MEMORANDUM* LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 14, 2015** Before: SILVERMAN, BERZON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Moises Velasquez-Medina, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial * 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). evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zhao v. Mukasey, 540 F.3d 1027, 1030 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that, even if credible, Velasquez-Medina failed to establish past persecution or a clear probability of future persecution on account of a protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1015-1016 (9th Cir. 2010); 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”). We reject Velasquez-Medina’s contention that the agency decisions do not provide adequate reasoning to allow a meaningful review. Thus, Velasquez-Medina’s withholding of removal claim fails. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 13-70281

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.