NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 13 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MIGUEL ANGEL RIVERA RODRIGUEZ, No. 14-70189 AKA Miguel Rivera, Agency No. A205-716-512 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted July 10, 2018** Before: CANBY, W. FLETCHER, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Miguel Angel Rivera Rodriguez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his * 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). application for asylum and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review. The record does not compel the conclusion that Rivera Rodriguez established changed or extraordinary circumstances to excuse his untimely asylum application. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.4(a)(4), (5). Thus, Rivera Rodriguez’s asylum claim fails. In his opening brief, Rivera Rodriguez does not reference withholding of removal or otherwise challenge the agency’s denial of the claim. See Corro- Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1175 n. 5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver. Thus, we deny the petition for review as to Rivera Rodriquez’s withholding of removal claim. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Rivera Rodriguez failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured with the consent or acquiescence of the government of El Salvador. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (2009). Finally, we reject as without merit Rivera Rodriguez’s contentions as to his 2 14-70189 membership in a class action lawsuit, his eligibility for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or his claim for Temporary Protected Status. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 14-70189 14-70189 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Miguel Rivera Rodriguez v. Jefferson Sessions 13 July 2018 Agency Unpublished 8e4009035b4ab2e76efb842eafeb6fb04161f293
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals