CARMELO HERRERA-HERNANDEZ, AKA Carmelo Hernandez-Herrera v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARMELO HERRERA-HERNANDEZ,
AKA Carmelo Hernandez-Herrera,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 15-73080
Agency No. A095-733-583
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 7, 2019**
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Carmelo Herrera-Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing Herrera-
Hernandez’s appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying Herrera-
Hernandez’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the
* 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
AUG 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 15-73080
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252(a)(1), and we deny the petition.
We review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163,
1166 (9th Cir. 2008), and we review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006).
The BIA did not err in finding that Herrera-Hernandez did not establish
membership in a cognizable social group. See Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125,
1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular group,
“[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of members who
share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3)
socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26
I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))); see also Barbosa v. Barr, 919 F.3d 1169,
1175 (9th Cir. 2019) (applying case law in which similar social groups were
proposed and finding that individuals returning to Mexico from the United States
who are believed to be wealthy does not constitute a particular social group).
Thus, Herrera-Hernandez’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
Herrera-Hernandez does not challenge the agency’s denial of CAT relief, so
that issue is waived.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --