FIGUEROA ZAVALA v. WILKINSON (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Martha FIGUEROA-ZAVALA, aka Marta Zavala Luna, aka Martha Zavala Luna, Petitioner, v. Robert M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 19-71760

Decided: January 27, 2021

Before: McKEOWN, CALLAHAN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges. Jesse Maanao, Attorney, Law Offices of Jeffrey C. Gonzales, Portland, OR, for Plaintiffs-Appellants Sunah Lee, Trial Attorney, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellee

MEMORANDUM **

Martha Figueroa-Zavala, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying her application for 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. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.

In her opening brief, Figueroa-Zavala does not challenge the agency's denial of her asylum and withholding of removal claims. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party's opening brief are waived).

Substantial evidence supports the agency's denial of CAT relief because Figueroa-Zavala failed to show it is more likely than not she 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); see also Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1033-35 (9th Cir. 2014) (concluding that petitioner did not establish the necessary “state action” for CAT relief); Dhital v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 1044, 1051 (9th Cir. 2008) (“the petitioner must demonstrate that he would be subject to a particularized threat of torture” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.