Charles Cornelis Christ Tewu v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHARLES CORNELIS CHRIST TEWU,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 12-72955
Agency No. A078-020-297
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 9, 2017**
Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Charles Cornelis Christ Tewu, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s order denying his application for asylum and 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
AUG 15 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 12-72955
evidence the agency’s factual findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-
85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Tewu failed to
establish his experiences in Indonesia rose to the level of persecution. See Halim
v. Holder, 590 F.3d 971, 975-76 (9th Cir. 2009) (record did not compel finding
past persecution where petitioner was harassed as a youth, refused medical care,
arrested, and beaten by a mob of rioters); Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1060
(9th Cir. 2009) (harm to associates was not ‘closely tied’ to petitioner). Substantial
evidence also supports the agency’s denial of relief where Tewu failed to establish
that the government of Indonesia would be unable or unwilling to control the
individuals that he fears in light of his mother’s testimony that “we have the
protection of the police” and that the police protected his church and Catholic
school from harm. See Nahrvani v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2005)
(record did not compel the conclusion that the government was unable or unwilling
to control petitioner’s harassers). Thus, his asylum claim fails.
In this case, because Tewu did not establish eligibility for asylum, he did not
satisfy the standard for withholding of removal. See id.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --