Riano-Pinilla
Riano-Pinilla v. Mukasey
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Petitioner Helverth Ricardo Riano-Pinilla petitions for review of the BIA’s decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for withholding of removal. We deny the petition.
Where, as here, the BIA conducts its own review of the evidence and law rather than adopting the IJ’s decision, the court’s “review is limited to the BIA’s decision, except to the extent that the IJ’s opinion is expressly adopted.” Hosseini v. Gonzales, 471 F.3d 953, 957 (9th Cir.2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). The BIA’s determination on withholding of removal is reviewed for substantial evidence and will only be reversed if the evidence would compel a reasonable fact-finder to conclude that relief is warranted. See Deloso v. Ashcroft, 393 F.3d 858, 863 (9th Cir.2005).
In order to qualify for withholding of removal, an applicant must show that it is more likely than not his “life or freedom would be threatened” if he returned to his homeland, on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (b)(3)(A); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16 (b). Petitioner applied for relief based on his *561 status…