
    Jorge Guadalupe Moreno RAMIREZ, aka Jorge Guadalupe Moreno, aka Beto Moreno, aka Jorge Moreno, aka Jorge Moreno Ramirez, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 13-72764.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Nov. 18, 2014.
    
    Filed Nov. 24, 2014.
    Zulu Ali, Law Office of Zulu Ali, Riverside, CA, for Petitioner.
    Elizabeth D. Kurlan, OIL, 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: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. 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

Jorge Guadalupe Moreno Ramirez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) 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 the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir.2006). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because Moreno Ramirez failed to establish that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Mexican government. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir.2008).

In denying Moreno Ramirez’s asylum and withholding of removal claims, the agency found he failed to establish past persecution or a fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground. The BIA did not consider the impact, if any, of this court’s recent decision in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir.2013) (en banc). Further, when the IJ and BIA issued its decisions, they did not have the benefit of this court’s decisions in Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir.2013), and Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir.2014), or the BIA’s decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G- 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of W-G-R- 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Thus, we remand Moreno Ramirez’s asylum and withholding of removal claims to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam).

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

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