NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MAY 12 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ROXANA MARICELA GONZALEZ No. 22-305 VELASQUEZ; DAYANA ANELISSE CHAVEZ GONZALEZ Agency Nos. A208-976-144 A208-976-145 Petitioners,

v. MEMORANDUM*

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent.

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

Submitted May 10, 2023** Seattle, Washington

Before: HAWKINS, FLETCHER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

* 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). Roxana Marciela Gonzalez Velasquez seeks review of an order of the Board

of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the decision of an Immigration Judge (IJ).

The IJ denied her applications for asylum (on which her minor child Dayana

Anelisse Chavez-Gonzalez is listed as a beneficiary), withholding of removal, and

relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8

U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1) and deny the petition for review.

Gonzalez Velasquez does not challenge the BIA’s determination that she is

not a member of her proposed particular social group of “romantic partners who

are unable to leave the relationship,” thereby forfeiting a challenge to the BIA’s

determination that she failed to establish a nexus between the alleged persecution

and a protected ground. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079–80

(9th Cir. 2013); Santos-Ponce v. Wilkinson, 987 F.3d 886, 891 (9th Cir. 2021).

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Gonzalez

Velasquez failed to establish eligibility for CAT protection based on her fear that

her former romantic partner Omar will torture her upon her return to El Salvador

with the consent or acquiescence of the Salvadoran government. The record shows

that Gonzalez Velasquez continued to live in El Salvador for two years after

leaving Omar, and Omar did not contact her or her family after they moved within

2 El Salvador nearly ten years ago. See Garcia v. Wilkinson, 988 F.3d 1136, 1148

(9th Cir. 2021).

PETITION DENIED.

3