Jose Vasquez Alvarado v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-60028 Affirmed ] Judge: EGJ , Judge: RHB , Judge: PRO Mandate pull date is 03/23/2015 [14-60028]

Case: 14-60028

Document: 00512920980

Page: 1

Date Filed: 01/30/2015

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-60028
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
JOSE GUADALUPE VASQUEZ ALVARADO,
Petitioner

January 30, 2015
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A200 938 977
Before JOLLY, BARKSDALE, and OWEN, Circuit Judges:
PER CURIAM: *
Jose Guadalupe Vasquez Alvarado, his wife, and his three children, all
natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of a Board of Immigration
Appeals decision dismissing their applications for asylum, withholding of
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), based on
threats that Vasquez received during a property dispute.

They do not

challenge dismissal of the asylum or withholding-of-removal claims; therefore,

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir.
R. 47.5.4.
*

Case: 14-60028

Document: 00512920980

Page: 2

Date Filed: 01/30/2015

No. 14-60028
these claims are waived. E.g., Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 593 n.10 (5th
Cir. 2007).
Review of factual findings underlying the conclusion that an alien is not
eligible for relief under CAT is conducted pursuant to the substantial-evidence
standard. Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006) (citations
omitted). Under that standard, we may not reverse unless “the evidence
supports a contrary conclusion . . . [and] compels it”. Id. (emphasis in original)
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
Petitioners assert: they are likely to be tortured if they return to Mexico;
and the Mexican government will disregard such torture.
however, shows:

The evidence,

criminals extorted Vasquez once; and, although these

criminals do not possess the deed they demanded from Vasquez, they control
the land to which the deed applies. The conclusory assertion that Vasquez or
his family will be tortured if they return to Mexico and that such torture will
be with the consent or acquiescence of the Mexican government is insufficient
to compel a conclusion different from that reached by the BIA.
DENIED.

2