Juan Manuel Calderon-Torres v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN MANUEL CALDERON-TORRES,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III,
Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-73378
Agency No. A037-581-229
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted July 11, 2018
Seattle, Washington
Before: FERNANDEZ, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Juan Manuel Calderon-Torres petitions for review of an order of removal
and the denial of his applications for withholding of removal and for relief under
the Convention Against Torture. We deny the petition for review.
FILED
JUL 20 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

-- 1 of 3 --

Substantial evidence supported the conclusion that the harm that Calderon-
Torres suffered did not rise to the level of persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319
F.3d 1179, 1181–82 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding that harassment, threats, and
mistreatment since early childhood—including a confrontation resulting in facial
bruises and two broken ribs—were not so severe as to rise to the level of
persecution). Calderon-Torres asserts that his case is distinguishable from Hoxha,
but the injuries suffered by Calderon-Torres, even considered cumulatively, were
not appreciably more severe than the harm alleged in Hoxha, and the factual
distinctions that Calderon-Torres identified were irrelevant to the question of
whether the past harm rose to the level of persecution. Nor did Calderon-Torres
establish a well-founded fear that he would suffer abuse in the future that would
amount to persecution. See 8 C.F.R. 1208.16(b)(2).
The evidence did not compel a conclusion that Calderon-Torres’ proposed
particular social groups (former gang members, those perceived to be active gang
members, and those who have refused recruitment efforts by drug cartels in
Mexico) are cognizable under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3). Calderon-Torres was
required to establish with evidence that at least one of his groups was socially
distinct within Mexican society. Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125, 1131–32, 1136
(9th Cir. 2016); Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077, 1084 (9th Cir. 2014). He
2

-- 2 of 3 --

relied upon his own testimony to meet this requirement, but that testimony did not
establish how the broader Mexican society treated others within the proposed
groups. His own experience was tied to himself individually. Notably, his arrest
and detention resulted from his possession of marijuana and his refusal to tell the
police its source after the police stopped him. That experience did not establish
how society or the police treated individuals within any of the purported social
groups who have not violated the law. The evidence that Calderon-Torres
presented therefore did not establish that his groups were socially distinct within
Mexican society.
Finally, substantial evidence supported the conclusion that it was not more
likely than not that Calderon-Torres would be tortured if removed to Mexico, as
required to obtain CAT relief. The testimony that Calderon-Torres provided did
not compel the conclusion that the mistreatment that he suffered was so severe that
it rose to the “extreme form of cruel and inhuman treatment” that is torture. 8
C.F.R. § 1208.18(a); see also Khudaverdyan v. Holder, 778 F.3d 1101, 1103, 1109
n.7 (9th Cir. 2015) (holding that the BIA did not err in concluding that the harm
that the applicant suffered, including being detained, beaten, and threatened by
military police, did not rise to the level of torture).
Petition DENIED.
3

-- 3 of 3 --