Iaroslav Zagorodnyi v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
IAROSLAV ZAGORODNYI,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 19-73036
Agency No. A216-627-039
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 19, 2022**
Before: SILVERMAN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Iaroslav Zagorodnyi, a native and citizen of Ukraine, 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
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
* 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
JAN 21 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 19-73036
§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye
v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Zagorodnyi failed to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or
with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Ukraine. See
Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009); see also Zheng v. Holder,
644 F.3d 829, 835-36 (9th Cir. 2011) (possibility of torture too speculative).
We reject as unsupported by the record Zagorodnyi’s contentions that the
agency ignored evidence or otherwise erred in its analysis of his CAT claim.
Zagorodnyi’s challenge to the immigration court’s jurisdiction is foreclosed
by Karingithi v. Whitaker, 913 F.3d 1158, 1159 (9th Cir. 2019), because he
received a notice of hearing that included the time and date of the hearing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --