
    Felix Guillen GONZALEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 08-72831.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 15, 2011.
    
    Filed June 29, 2011.
    William E. Rowen, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Felix Guillen Gonzalez, pro se.
    Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Oil, Ernesto Horacio Molina, Jr., Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, Joanna L. Watson, Trial, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Felix Guillen Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the BIA’s factual findings and will uphold the BIA’s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of asylum and withholding of removal because Gonzalez failed to establish that he was harmed or is at risk of being harmed on account of any protected ground. See Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812.

Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because Gonzalez failed to demonstrate that he would be tortured by or with the acquiescence of the Guatemalan government. See Zheng v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1194 (9th Cir.2003).

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