FILED
                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             DEC 28 2009

                                                                         MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS




                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT



 CARLOS FILADELFO ALVARADO,                       No. 08-70797
 a.k.a. Carlos Alvarado Anaya,
                                                  Agency No. A095-022-857
               Petitioner,

   v.                                             MEMORANDUM *

 ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

               Respondent.



                       On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                           Board of Immigration Appeals

                             Submitted December 15, 2009 **

Before:        GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

        Carlos Filadelfo Alvarado, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming an immigration

judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal and protection

          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
          **
             The panel unanimously concludes this is case suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NED/Research
under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 

, 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, 

, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We review factual findings for

substantial evidence. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 

, 1184-85 (9th Cir.

2006). We deny the petition for review.

       We reject Alvarado’s claim that he is eligible for withholding of removal

based on his membership in a particular social group, namely, small business

owners in El Salvador who fear being harmed by gangs if they report them to

police. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 

, 1170 (9th Cir. 2005) (rejecting as a

particular social group “business owners in Colombia who rejected demands by

narco-traffickers to participate in illegal activity”); Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 

, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008) (rejecting as a particular social group “young men

in El Salvador resisting gang violence”) (internal quotation omitted).

       Accordingly, because Alvarado failed to demonstrate that he was persecuted

on account of a protected ground, we deny the petition as to his withholding of

removal claim. See Barrios v. Holder, 

, 856 (9th Cir. 2009).




NED/Research                              2                                    08-70797
       Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because

Alvarado did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the instigation of, or with

the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran government. See Zheng v.

Ashcroft, 

, 1194 (9th Cir. 2003).

       PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.




NED/Research                               3                                     08-70797