Espinoza
Espinoza v. Mukasey
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Julio Guillermo Gorbitz Espinoza, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of *478 removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review factual findings for substantial evidence, Cruz-Navarro v. INS, 232 F.3d 1024, 1028 (9th Cir.2000), and deny the petition for review.
The record does not compel the conclusion that the extraordinary circumstances exception excused the untimely filing of Gorbitz Espinoza’s asylum application. See Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 648, 657-58 (9th Cir.2007) (per curiam); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4 (a)(5).
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of withholding of removal because Gorbitz Espinoza failed to establish that the Shining Path persecuted him on account of an imputed political opinion. See Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089, 1094-95 (9th Cir.2002) (no imputed political opinion where petitioner offered no evidence that his father had a political opinion that could be imputed to…