Francisco Ruben Lugo- Gonzalez v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANCISCO RUBEN LUGO-
GONZALEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-71076
Agency No. A088-884-115
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 22, 2015**
Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Francisco Ruben Lugo-Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for an
FILED
JUN 30 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Cano-Merida v. INS,
311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Lugo-Gonzalez’s motion to
reopen as to his Convention Against Torture claim because the evidence he
provided was not particular to him and did not establish it is more likely than not
he will be tortured by the Mexican government or with its consent or acquiescence.
See INS v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94, 104 (1988) (the BIA may deny a motion to reopen
for failure to establish a prima facie case for the relief sought). Lugo-Gonzalez
does not challenge the BIA’s denial of his motion to reopen as to his asylum and
withholding of removal claims. 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). We reject Lugo-Gonzalez’s contention that the BIA misstated
the record. Thus, we deny the petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-71076 2

-- 2 of 2 --