Sara Alicia Gonzalez-Castillo v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SARA ALICIA GONZALEZ-CASTILLO,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 19-70702
Agency No. A208-449-182
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 1, 2022**
Before: FRIEDLAND, SANCHEZ, and H. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Sara Alicia Gonzalez-Castillo, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions
pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing
her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for
* 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 8 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 19-70702
withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture
(“CAT”).1
We have 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). We deny the petition for review.
The IJ concluded that Gonzalez-Castillo was not credible, which precluded
her from establishing eligibility for withholding of removal. See Shrestha v.
Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1048 (9th Cir. 2010) (“Absent [the] discredited testimony,
there is no objective evidence that establishes a ‘clear probability’ that upon return
to [his country the petitioner] will be subject to persecution based on a protected
ground.”). The BIA determined that Gonzalez-Castillo waived any challenge to
that adverse credibility determination by failing to raise one in her brief to the BIA.
In this petition for review, she did not raise, and has therefore waived, any
challenge to the BIA’s waiver determination. See Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718
F.3d 1174, 1177 n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (concluding that an issue not contested in an
opening brief is waived). Thus, her withholding of removal claim fails.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection
1 Gonzalez-Castillo conceded before the IJ that her asylum application was
untimely, and she did not seek to establish eligibility for an exception to the
deadline. Accordingly, only her claims for withholding of removal and CAT
protection were before the BIA.

-- 2 of 3 --

3 19-70702
because Gonzalez-Castillo failed to show it is more likely than not 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.

-- 3 of 3 --