Marino Luis Garcia v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARINO LUIS GARCIA,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 20-71497
Agency No. A208-825-023
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 8, 2021**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
Marino Luis Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
* 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
NOV 18 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 20-71497
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C § 1252. We review de novo claims of due
process violations in immigration proceedings. Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d
532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We also review de novo the legal question of whether a
particular social group is cognizable, except to the extent that deference is owed to
the BIA’s interpretation of the governing statutes and regulations. Conde Quevedo
v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241-42 (9th Cir. 2020). We review for substantial
evidence the agency’s factual findings. Id. at 1241. We deny the petition for
review.
Luis Garcia’s contentions that the agency violated his right to due process,
deprived him of the right to counsel, or otherwise erred in its handling and analysis
of his case fail. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring
error and prejudice to prevail on a due process claim).
The agency did not err in concluding that Luis Garcia did not establish
membership in a cognizable particular 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))). Thus, Luis Garcia’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail.

-- 2 of 3 --

3 20-71497
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Luis Garcia failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with
the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See Aden v.
Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the
mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --