                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED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

JUAN LOPEZ SAUCEDO,                             No.    15-72107

                Petitioner,                     Agency No. A091-495-146

 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.

      Juan Lopez Saucedo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of

removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have


      *
             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).
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v.

Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except to the extent that deference

is owed to the BIA’s determination of the governing statutes and regulations,

Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We review for

substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d

1007, 1012 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

         The agency did not err in finding that Saucedo failed to establish

membership in a cognizable social group. See Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125,

1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (“[To demonstrate membership in a particular social group,]

[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of members who

share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3)

socially distinct within the society in question.” (quoting Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I.

& N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))). Thus, Saucedo’s withholding of removal claim

fails.

         Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because

Saucedo failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or

with the consent or acquiescence of the government of Mexico. See Aden v.

Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (2009).

                                            2                                 15-72107
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.




                       3      15-72107
