Patel

MEMORANDUM **

Mitesh Patel petitions for review of two Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) orders, the first of which affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“U”) decision denying Patel’s application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture, and the second of which denied his motion to reopen on account of his marriage to a United States citizen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the petitions.

When, as here, it is unclear whether the BIA conducted a de novo review, we “look to the IJ’s oral decision as a guide to what lay behind the BIA’s conclusion.” Avetova-Elisseva v. INS, 213 F.3d 1192, 1197 (9th Cir.2000) (as amended). We review for substantial evidence the BIA’s determination that an applicant has not established asylum eligibility. Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1018 (9th Cir.2006).

Substantial evidence in the record supports the BIA’s conclusion that Patel failed to demonstrate an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution in India on account of one of the protected grounds. Patel’s parents have continued to live in Gujarat without incident, weakening his claims for protection on account of his religion…