BENAVIDES v. SESSIONS III (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Agustin Benavides, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1012 (9th Cir. 2010). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Benavides’s contentions regarding political opinion that he raises for the first time in his opening brief. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (petitioner must exhaust issues or claims in administrative proceedings below).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Benavides failed to establish that the harm he experienced or fears in El Salvador was or would be on account of a protected ground. See id. at 1016 (An applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”); Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1151 (9th Cir. 2010) (“Asylum is not available to victims of indiscriminate violence, unless they are singled out on account of a protected ground.”). Thus, Benavides’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.

PETITION FOR REVIEW IS DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.