context: Substantial evidence supports the agency's finding that Rosas-Grijalva failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 555 F.3d 734, 740
citation_a.parenthetical: the REAL ID Act "requires that a protected ground represent 'one central reason' for an asylum applicant's persecution"
citation_a.sentence: See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir.2009) (the REAL ID Act “requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s persecution”); see also Molina-Morales v. INS, 237 F.3d 1048, 1051-52 (9th Cir.2001) (personal retribution is not persecution on account of a protected ground); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir.2010) (“An alien’s desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground.”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 237 F.3d 1048, 1051-52
citation_b.parenthetical: personal retribution is not persecution on account of a protected ground
citation_b.sentence: See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir.2009) (the REAL ID Act “requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s persecution”); see also Molina-Morales v. INS, 237 F.3d 1048, 1051-52 (9th Cir.2001) (personal retribution is not persecution on account of a protected ground); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir.2010) (“An alien’s desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground.”).