
    Javier Angelo TUEROS-DE LAMA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 12-71990.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 12, 2014.
    
    Filed June 16, 2014.
    Zulu Ali, Zulu Abdullah Ali, Riverside, CA, for Petitioner.
    Joseph Anthony O’Connell, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Javier Angelo Tueros-De Lama, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence. factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir.2006). We deny the petition for review.

Tueros-De Lama does not challenge the agency’s dispositive findings that he is statutorily ineligible for asylum due to his aggravated felony conviction and statutorily ineligible for withholding of removal based on the agency’s determination that his conviction constitutes a particularly serious crime. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived); Bazuaye v. INS, 79 F.3d 118, 120 (9th Cir.1996) (per curiam) (declining to reach issue raised for the first time in the reply brief). Thus, Tueros-De Lama’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.

With respect to CAT relief, substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Tueros-De Lama failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be tortured if removed to Peru. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir.2008).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     