
    Gevorg KARAGARYAN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-74442.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 19, 2010.
    
    Filed July 29, 2010.
    Artem M. Sarian, Esquire, Sarian Law Group, APLC, Glendale, CA, for Petitioner.
    OIL, Edward Earl Wiggers, Esquire, John Hogan, Senior Litigation Counsel, 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: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Karagaryan’s request for oral argument is denied.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Gevorg Karagaryan, a native of the former Soviet Union and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) 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, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and we grant in part and deny in part the petition for review, and remand.

Karagaryan witnessed harm to his father when he was a small child. Because the IJ did not have, and the BIA may not have had, the benefit of our decision in Hemandez-Ortiz v. Gonzales in analyzing Karagaryan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims, we grant the petition and remand for further proceedings as to those claims. See Hemandez-Ortiz v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 1042, 1046 (9th Cir.2007) (agency erred by failing to look at events forming the basis of past persecution from child’s perspective and measure the degree of injury by the impact on children of that age); see also INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam).

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because Karagaryan failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be tortured in Armenia. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir .2009).

Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.

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