22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T4e8,MEMORANDUM Vladimir B. Belinski, his wife, Svetlana Belinski, and their children, Angelina Be-linski, Vladimir V. Belinski, Yulia Belinski, and Dennis Belinski (collectively “the Bel-inskis”) are natives and citizens of Tajikistan and citizens of Israel. Their youngest child, Dianna Belinski, is a native and citizen of Canada. The Belinskis appeal the Board of Immigration Appeals decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the Belinskis’ petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that the Belinskis did not establish that the Israeli government was unable or unwilling to control their alleged persecutors. See Robleto-Pastora v. Holder, 567 F.3d 437, 442 (9th Cir.2009), amended by 591 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir.2009). We therefore deny the Belinskis’ petition for review because the IJ’s decision, affirmed without opinion by the Board of Immigration Appeals, is supported by substantial evidence. PETITION DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T515,

MEMORANDUM

Vladimir B. Belinski, his wife, Svetlana Belinski, and their children, Angelina Be-linski, Vladimir V. Belinski, Yulia Belinski, and Dennis Belinski (collectively “the Bel-inskis”) are natives and citizens of Tajikistan and citizens of Israel. Their youngest child, Dianna Belinski, is a native and citizen of Canada. The Belinskis appeal the Board of Immigration Appeals decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the Belinskis’ petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that the Belinskis did not establish that the Israeli government was unable or unwilling to control their alleged persecutors. See Robleto-Pastora v. Holder, 567 F.3d 437, 442 (9th Cir.2009), amended by 591 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir.2009). We therefore deny the Belinskis’ petition for review because the IJ’s decision, affirmed without opinion by the Board of Immigration Appeals, is supported by substantial evidence.

PETITION DENIED.

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