in the society in question, as a discrete class of persons,” Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081, 1083, 1091 (9th Cir.2013) (en banc) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted), and (3) “is understood to exist as a recognized component of the society in question,” Matter of W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208, 217 (BIA 2014), cited favorably in Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077, 1079 (9th Cir.2014). Nor does the record compel the conclusion that the Chinese government persecuted Lin because of his opposition to political corruption. Id. at 223-24 (discussing nexus requirement). Rather, the record supports the BIA’s conclusion that Lin’s persecutor&emdash;a private individual&emdash;targeted him for personal reasons. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097-98 (9th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). Lin has therefore failed to established
holding that harm purely motivated by wealth is not persecution holding that absent past persecution an alien can demonstrate eligibility for asylum based on a wellfounded fear of future persecution by demonstrating that he or she subjectively fears persecution and that this fear is objectively reasonable holding that an alien cannot claim asylum based on persecution that is personally motivated holding that alien cannot rely on spouses forced abortion to establish automatic asylum eligibility based on past persecution holding that to establish asylum eligibility based on future persecution an applicant must show that he or she subjectively fears persecution and that this fear is objectively reasonable