CHRISTIAN CASTRO-ALVARADO, AKA Omar Cosio-Alvarado v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHRISTIAN CASTRO-ALVARADO,
AKA Omar Cosio-Alvarado,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-71004
Agency No. A206-407-221
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 15, 2017**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Christian Castro-Alvarado, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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 relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
* 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
NOV 22 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 16-71004
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), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Castro-Alvarado
failed to establish a nexus between the harm he fears and a protected ground. See
Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011) (even if membership in a
particular social group is established, an applicant must still show that “persecution
was or will be on account of his membership in such group” (emphasis in
original)); see also Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“An
[applicant’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.”). Thus,
his asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
We do not address Castro-Alvarado’s contentions regarding the one-year
asylum bar, credibility, the cognizability of his proposed social group, and the
government’s willingness or ability to control his alleged persecutors because the
BIA did not deny relief on these grounds. See Santiago-Rodriguez v. Holder, 657
F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir. 2011).
Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Castro-
Alvarado’s CAT claim because he did not demonstrate it is more likely than not
that he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government

-- 2 of 3 --

3 16-71004
if returned to Mexico. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir.
2008). We reject his contention that the agency applied an incorrect legal standard.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --