Juan Aguilar Avila v. Merrick Garland

facts supporting a reasonable fear of persecution on the relevant ground”) (citation

omitted). Aguilar Avila’s sparse and conclusory statements that he fears dangerous

conditions and gang violence in Mexico and El Salvador does not meet the

requisite level of specificity to satisfy his burden. See id.; see also

Duran-Rodriguez, 918 F.3d at 1028 (“Persecution is an extreme concept that does

3 not include every sort of treatment our society regards as offensive.”) (citation and

internal quotation marks omitted).

2. Because Aguilar Avila failed to meet the lower burden of proof for

asylum, he necessarily failed to satisfy the clear probability standard required to

establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Sharma v. Garland, 9 F.4th

1052, 1066 (9th Cir. 2021).

3. Substantial evidence also supports the denial of CAT relief. Aguilar

Avila’s general assertion that he will be tortured if returned to Mexico or El

Salvador is not supported by the record and is not based on a particularized harm to

him. See Eneh v. Holder, 601 F.3d 943, 948 (9th Cir. 2010) (explaining that “a

petitioner must show for purposes of CAT relief that someone—either a

government official…