MEMORANDUM **

Danielian hasn’t established that the evidence compels reversal. See Singh v. INS, 134 F.3d 962, 966 (9th Cir. 1998). The events Danielian described didn’t rise to the level of persecution. Persecution doesn’t include every sort of treatment our society regards as unjust or offensive. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 961 (9th Cir. 1996). Nor did Danielian present “credible, direct, and specific evidence” to support his fear of future persecution. Duarte de Guinac v. INS, 179 F.3d 1156, 1159 (9th Cir. 1999).

Because Danielian hasn’t met the standard for asylum, he can’t meet the more rigorous standard for withholding of removal. Nahrvani v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2005). In addition, “substantial evidence supports the IJ’s denial for relief under” the Convention Against Torture because Danielian hasn’t presented evidence that it is “more likely than not” that he will be tortured if returned to Armenia. Id.

PETITION DENIED.