Carlos Alfredo Reanos-Morel v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARLOS ALFREDO REANOS-MOREL,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-73791
Agency No. A200-770-846
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 17, 2019**
Seattle, Washington
Before: KLEINFELD and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and PAULEY,*** District
Judge.
Carlos Alfredo Reanos-Morel, a citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of
the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his applications
FILED
JUN 18 2019
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.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
*** The Honorable William H. Pauley III, United States District Judge for
the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 3 --

for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against
Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and deny the petition.
Reanos-Morel has not presented a substantial argument that his fear of
returning to his home country bears a “nexus” to the protected ground of
persecution by reason of membership in a “particular social group.” We assume
for purposes of this decision only that the “particular social group” of informants in
Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081, 1092 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), applies
to Reanos-Morel’s proposed social group. Even assuming that Reanos-Morel’s
proposed social group is cognizable under Henriquez-Rivas, Reanos-Morel must
establish that any persecution was or will be “on account of” his membership in
such a group. Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1098 (9th Cir. 2011). Reanos-
Morel, however, did not challenge the BIA’s conclusion that “gang members
threatened [him] for no other reason than to seek personal revenge for reporting
their crime.” Since Reanos-Morel’s brief does not present an argument that the
threats were on account of membership in the claimed particular social group, the
issue is waived, and the claims for asylum and withholding of removal fail. See
Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996); see also Zetino v.
Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (holding that generalized fears of
2

-- 2 of 3 --

criminal violence are not cognizable grounds for asylum or withholding of
removal).
Although Reanos-Morel did preserve his Convention Against Torture claim,
substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the BIA’s conclusion that
Reanos-Morel has “not shown that he is more likely than not to be tortured in his
country, by or with the acquiescence (including willful blindness) of a government
official upon return” and thus supports the denial of Convention relief. Aden v.
Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION DENIED.
3

-- 3 of 3 --