Narrative Opinion Summary
A Guatemalan national appeals a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which upheld the Immigration Judge's denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court reviews the BIA's decision under the substantial evidence standard, affirming it as well-supported. The appellant failed to demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution necessary for asylum, with the court noting that threats and conscription attempts by guerrillas and claims of limited healthcare access do not meet the legal threshold for persecution. Additionally, changes in Guatemala since his departure and his family's safe residence there further weaken his claim. As the appellant does not meet the asylum criteria, he also fails to qualify for withholding of removal or CAT relief, which require a higher likelihood of harm. The court also dismisses his due process challenge to the BIA's summary affirmance, finding it consistent with established circuit precedents. The disposition is affirmed, and the opinion is not for publication or citation except as specified by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Criteria for Withholding of Removal and CAT Reliefsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Since the appellant fails to meet the asylum criteria, he also does not qualify for withholding of removal or CAT relief, as these require a higher likelihood of harm.
Reasoning: Since Machic fails to meet the criteria for asylum, he likewise does not qualify for withholding of removal or CAT relief, both of which require a higher likelihood of suffering harm upon return.
Definition of Persecution in Asylum Claimssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court interprets persecution strictly, excluding discrimination based on race or religion, and finds the appellant's claims insufficient.
Reasoning: The definition of persecution is strictly interpreted, typically excluding discrimination based on race or religion.
Due Process in BIA's Summary Affirmancesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's due process claim regarding the BIA's summary affirmance is rejected, consistent with prior rulings that streamlining does not violate due process rights.
Reasoning: Machic's due process claim regarding the BIA's summary affirmance is rejected, aligning with prior circuit rulings that streamlining does not violate due process rights.
Eligibility for Asylum under Immigration Lawsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: To qualify for asylum, the appellant must demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on specific factors. The court finds that the appellant's experiences do not meet this threshold.
Reasoning: To qualify for asylum, Machic must demonstrate either past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on specific factors, including race and political opinion.
Significant Changes in Country of Originsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court notes significant changes in Guatemala since the appellant's departure, which undermine his claims of a well-founded fear of future persecution.
Reasoning: Additionally, significant changes in Guatemala since Machic's departure in 1992 undermine his claims of a well-founded fear of future persecution.
Standard of Review for BIA Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court applies the substantial evidence standard to review the BIA's decision, requiring reversal only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.
Reasoning: The review standard applied is substantial evidence, requiring reversal only if evidence compels a contrary conclusion.