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:T491,MEMORANDUM Orlando Gonzalez-Henriquez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief based on its findings that Gonzalez-Henriquez did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran government, see Zheng v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1194 (9th Cir.2003) (acquiescence requires “both actual knowledge and willful blindness”), and its finding that Gonzalez-Henriquez failed to show he would be unable to relocate safely within El Salvador, see Hasan v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 1114, 1122-23 (9th Cir.2004). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T4be,

MEMORANDUM

Orlando Gonzalez-Henriquez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief based on its findings that Gonzalez-Henriquez did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran government, see Zheng v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1194 (9th Cir.2003) (acquiescence requires “both actual knowledge and willful blindness”), and its finding that Gonzalez-Henriquez failed to show he would be unable to relocate safely within El Salvador, see Hasan v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 1114, 1122-23 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

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