Carlos Mares v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARLOS MARES,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 22-1225
Agency No.
A092-986-681
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2023**
San Francisco, California
Before: BEA, CHRISTEN and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges.
Carlos Mares (“Petitioner”), a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his
appeal of the denial by an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) of his applications 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
OCT 25 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 22-1225
withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1). We deny the petition.
Where the BIA has explicitly affirmed and adopted portions of the IJ’s
findings and cited Matter of Burbano, 20 I. & N. Dec. 872 (B.I.A. 1994), we
review those portions of the IJ’s decision as though it were the BIA’s. Chuen Piu
Kwong v. Holder, 671 F.3d 872, 876 (9th Cir. 2011); Santiago-Rodriguez v.
Holder, 657 F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir. 2011). We review legal conclusions de novo
and factual findings for substantial evidence. Ali v. Holder, 637 F.3d 1025, 1028–
29 (9th Cir. 2011).
Petitioner did not raise the particular social group of “Mexicans deported
from the United States” in his proceedings before the IJ. Because this group was
not before the IJ, the BIA did not err in declining to consider this group for the first
time on appeal, Honcharov v. Barr, 924 F.3d 1293, 1297 (9th Cir. 2019), and this
Court declines to consider this new particular social group in the first instance,
Santiago-Rodriguez, 657 F.3d at 829.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that Petitioner has not met his
burden to show that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured if returned to
Mexico. In the record, Petitioner only provided generalized evidence of violence
and torture in Mexico, which is insufficient to meet his burden under the CAT.

-- 2 of 3 --

3 22-1225
Flores-Vega v. Barr, 932 F.3d 878, 887 (9th Cir. 2019); Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder,
600 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir. 2010).
PETITION DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --