Jacobo Campillo-Ramirez v. ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JACOBO CAMPILLO-RAMIREZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting
Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-72698
Agency No. A205-157-930
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 9, 2021**
San Francisco, California
Before: McKEOWN, IKUTA, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
Jacobo Campillo-Ramirez, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of
the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that affirmed the decision
FILED
MAR 11 2021
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).

-- 1 of 2 --

of the immigration judge (IJ) denying his application for withholding of removal.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition for review.
Campillo-Ramirez did not establish past persecution on account of political
opinion because he did not establish a nexus between the beating he suffered while
in the military and a protected ground. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A); Singh v.
Barr, 935 F.3d 822, 827 (9th Cir. 2019) (per curiam). Campillo-Ramirez did not
establish a clear probability of future persecution on account of his membership in
the particular social group of “former military members,” because he failed to
carry his burden of showing that it would not be reasonable for him relocate. 8
C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(3)(i)–(ii). Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the
BIA’s rejection of his claim for withholding of removal based on future
persecution, 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(2).
PETITION DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --