Monica Susana Chavez v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MONICA SUSANA CHAVEZ, et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-70438
Agency Nos. A202-122-289
A202-122-290
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 11, 2022**
Before: McKEOWN, CHRISTEN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
Monica Susana Chavez and her minor son, natives and citizens of El
Salvador, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order
dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their
application for asylum, and denying Chavez’s application for withholding of
* 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
APR 15 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-70438
removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241 (9th Cir.
2020). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that petitioners
failed to establish that the harm they experienced or fear was or will be on account
of a protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483 (1992) (an
applicant “must provide some evidence of [motive], direct or circumstantial”); 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, the asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Chavez failed to show that it is more likely than not that she will be tortured by or
with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to El Salvador. See
Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the
mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --