JOSE SANTOS TORRES-ARIAS, AKA Jose Santos Arias, AKA Jose Santos Torresarias v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE SANTOS TORRES-ARIAS, AKA
Jose Santos Arias, AKA Jose Santos
Torresarias,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 18-70979
Agency No. A205-671-936
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 8, 2022**
Phoenix, Arizona
Before: PAEZ, CLIFTON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Jose Santos Torres-Arias, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding the
immigration judge’s denial of his applications for withholding of removal and
* 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
MAR 16 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

Page 2 of 3
protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We deny the petition.
1. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that petitioner
is ineligible for withholding of removal because he failed to establish a nexus
between any harm and a protected ground. To qualify for withholding, a petitioner
must show a “clear probability” of persecution in the country of removal on
account of his race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group,
or political opinion. 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A); 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b); Navas v. INS,
217 F.3d 646, 655 (9th Cir. 2000).
Torres-Arias asserts the proposed particular social group of his family.
While “family membership may constitute membership in a particular social
group,” Bhasin v. Gonzalez, 423 F.3d 977, 984 (9th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation
marks and citation omitted), the agency properly found that any animus directed at
Torres-Arias from the Marquez family stemmed from his role in the accidental
death of a member of the Marquez family, not from petitioner’s membership in his
own family. Torres-Arias has thus failed to demonstrate the required nexus to a
protected ground.
2. Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s determination that
Torres-Arias did not qualify for CAT protection. To be entitled to CAT protection,
Torres-Arias must establish that, if returned to his home country, he is “more likely
than not” to face torture by or with the government’s acquiescence. 8 C.F.R.

-- 2 of 3 --

Page 3 of 3
§ 208.16(c)(2).
As the agency concluded, although Torres-Arias may face some risk of harm
in his hometown and the larger community of Tepic, given that a member of the
Marquez family now serves as mayor of petitioner’s hometown, the record
evidence shows that he does not face a “clear probability” of torture outside of
those circumscribed areas of Mexico. Zhang v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 713, 721–22
(9th Cir. 2004). There is no indication that the agency failed to consider all
relevant evidence, and the record evidence does not compel a conclusion contrary
to that reached by the agency. See Zheng v. Holder, 644 F.3d 829, 835 (9th Cir.
2011).
3. Torres-Arias’s argument that the agency lacked jurisdiction over
proceedings in this case is foreclosed by Karingithi v. Whitaker, 913 F.3d 1158,
1160–62 (9th Cir. 2019).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --