
    Flora GJURA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 11-566-ag.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Nov. 13, 2012.
    Gregory G. Marotta, Vernon, NJ, for Petitioner.
    
      Andrew B. Insenga, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice (Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Ada E. Bos-que, Senior Litigation Counsel, on the brief) Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Present: ROSEMARY S. POOLER, RICHARD C. WESLEY, RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR., Circuit Judges.
   SUMMARY ORDER

Flora Gjura, a native and citizen of Albania, seeks review of a January 31, 2011 order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) reversing the September 9, 2008 decision of Immigration Judge (“U”) Terry A. Bain, which granted her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We withdraw our opinion previously issued in this matter, Gjura v. Holder, 695 F.3d 223 (2d Cir.2012). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and specification of issues for review.

We need not decide the issue of whether young, unmarried Albanian women constitute a social group for asylum purposes. Even assuming arguendo that Gjura is a member of a social group, the petition for review is denied because Gjura failed to demonstrate past persecution. According to the 2006 State Department Country Report, individuals outside of Gjura’s defined group were equally subject to abduction and forced prostitution, including married women and children. Because Gjura failed to establish a nexus between her attacks and her membership in a particular social group, the BIA did not err in concluding that she did not establish eligibility for relief based on past persecution. Gomez v. I.N.S., 947 F.2d 660, 664 (2d Cir.1991).

In addition, to establish eligibility for relief, an applicant must also show that she suffered or will suffer persecution by either the government or private individuals that the government “is unable or unwilling to control.” Rizal v. Gonzales, 442 F.3d 84, 92 (2d Cir.2006); Matter of Acosta, 19 I. & N. Dec. 211, 222, 236 (BIA 1985), overruled on other grounds by Matter of Mogharrabi, 19 I. & N. Dec. 439 (BIA 1987). Gjura alleged that the Albanian police repeatedly failed to investigate the attacks against her and prevent attacks from later occurring to her sister and cousin. However, the BIA reasonably found that Gjura failed to establish that the Albanian government was unable or unwilling to protect her from her alleged attackers. The 2006 State Department Country Report Gjura submitted indicated that the Albanian government had increased its prosecutions of sex traffickers, and was working to address trafficking-related corruption in its police force. Because a showing of government involvement or inability to control is required for a grant of asylum or withholding of removal, the BIA did not err in denying Gjura’s application. See Rizal, 442 F.3d at 92; Matter of Acosta, 19 I. & N. Dec. at 222, 236.

We therefore DENY the petition for review.  