Useche-Torres

facts contained in Petitioner Useche-Torres’s application. Petitioners Useche- Torres and Bustos-Vargas also seek asylum as derivative beneficiaries of each other, and their children seek asylum as derivative beneficiaries of both parents.

24-4130 but noted that no physical harm had come to Petitioners. Because the IJ’s decision

itself effectively addressed the matters Petitioners raised to the BIA, there was no

error in the BIA’s adoption of the IJ’s opinion on appeal. See Abebe v. Gonzales,

432 F.3d 1037, 1040-41 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc).

2. Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s determination that Petitioners

are not entitled to relief under CAT. See Lalayan v. Garland, 4 F.4th 822, 840

(9th Cir. 2021). As the IJ explained, the record does not establish that Petitioners

experienced torture in the past, and their fears of future torture were speculative.

Petition DENIED.2

2 The temporary stay of removal will remain in place until the mandate issues.

24-4130