Cristian Samuel Cardona Fuentes v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CRISTIAN SAMUEL CARDONA
FUENTES,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-73009
Agency No. A200-691-175
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 14, 2016**
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Cristian Samuel Cardona Fuentes, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for
withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
* 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
JUN 22 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 14-73009
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
the agency’s factual findings. Molina-Morales v. INS, 237 F.3d 1048, 1050 (9th
Cir. 2001). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that the harm
Cardona Fuentes suffered did not rise to the level of persecution. See Lim v. INS,
224 F.3d 929, 936 (9th Cir. 2000) (“Threats standing alone . . . constitute past
persecution in only a small category of cases, and only when the threats are so
menacing as to cause significant actual “‘suffering or harm.’”). Substantial
evidence also supports the agency’s determination that Cardona Fuentes failed to
establish a protected ground would be a central reason for the harm he fears. See
Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009); see also Molina-
Morales, 237 F.3d at 1052 (harm based on personal retribution is not persecution
on account of a protected ground). We reject Cardona Fuentes’s contention that
the agency discounted his testimony. Thus, we deny the petition for review as to
Cardona Fuentes’s withholding of removal claim.

-- 2 of 3 --

3 14-73009
Finally, substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
because Cardona Fuentes failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be
tortured by the Guatemalan government, or with its consent or acquiescence. See
Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1034-35 (9th Cir. 2014).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --