CARLOS ERNESTO HENRIQUEZ, AKA Carlos Ernesto Enriquez v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARLOS ERNESTO HENRIQUEZ, AKA
Carlos Ernesto Enriquez,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
Nos. 15-71514
16-71400
17-71187
Agency No. A077-079-920
ORDER
Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Henriquez’s petition for panel rehearing is granted. The memorandum
disposition filed on March 26, 2018, is withdrawn. A replacement memorandum
disposition is being filed concurrently with this order.
Henriquez’s petition for rehearing en banc is denied as moot.
No further petitions for rehearing will be entertained in this case.
FILED
SEP 24 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 4 --

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARLOS ERNESTO HENRIQUEZ, AKA
Carlos Ernesto Enriquez,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
Nos. 15-71514
16-71400
17-71187
Agency No. A077-079-920
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Carlos Ernesto Henriquez, 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 relief under the
* 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
SEP 24 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 2 of 4 --

2 15-71514
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) (No. 15-71514), and the BIA’s orders
denying his two motions to reopen removal proceedings (Nos. 16-71400 and 17-
71187). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence the agency’s factual findings, Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026,
1031 (9th Cir. 2014), and for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen,
Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petitions for
review.
As to petition No. 15-71514, substantial evidence supports the agency’s
denial of Henriquez’s CAT claim because he failed to establish it is more likely
than not that he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the
government of El Salvador. See Garcia-Milian, 755 F.3d at 1033-35 (concluding
that petitioner did not establish the necessary “state action” for CAT relief); Zheng
v. Holder, 644 F.3d 829, 835-36 (9th Cir. 2011) (possibility of torture too
speculative); Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir. 2010)
(petitioners’ generalized evidence of violence and crime was not particular to
petitioners and was insufficient to meet the CAT standard).
As to petition No. 16-71400, in his opening brief, Henriquez fails to
challenge the denial of his first motion to reopen. See Corro-Barragan v. Holder,

-- 3 of 4 --

3 15-71514
718 F.3d 1174, 1177 n. 5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief
resulted in waiver).
Finally, as to petition No. 17-71187, the BIA did not abuse its discretion by
denying Henriquez’s second motion to reopen as untimely and number-barred
where he failed to establish circumstances warranting equitable tolling. See 8
C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2); Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1193 (9th Cir. 2001)
(describing situations where equitable tolling may apply).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 4 of 4 --