
    Blanca Celia MOREIRA-FLORES, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-72152.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 16, 2010.
    
    Filed Nov. 22, 2010.
    Blanca Celia Moreira-Flores, Van Nuys, CA, for Petitioner.
    
      CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, David V. Bernal, Attorney, Jesse Bless, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Blanca Celia Moreira-Flores, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her 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. Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir.2008). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Moreira-Flores’s fear of criminal gangs in her native El Salvador did not demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future harm on account of a protected ground. See Ramos-Lopez v. Holder, 563 F.3d 855, 860-62 (9th Cir.2009). Accordingly, Moreira-Flores’s asylum claim fails.

Because Moreira-Flores did not establish eligibility for asylum, it follows that she did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir.2006).

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection because Moreira-Flores failed to establish it is more likely than not she will be tortured if she returns to El Salvador. See SantosLemus, 542 F.3d at 747-48.

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