*1 Before: McKEOWN, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Araksi Seropovna Tokramadzhyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) determination under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(a) that she did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture and *2 thus is not entitled to relief from her reinstated removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. See Martinez v. Sessions , No. 14-70339, 2017 WL 4552543 (9th Cir. Oct. 12, 2017). We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s factual findings, Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch , 828 F.3d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 2016), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Tokramadzhyan failed to establish a reasonable possibility of future persecution in Armenia on account of a protected ground. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft , 319 F.3d 1179, 1185 (9th Cir. 2003) (to qualify for withholding of removal, a petitioner must show that it is more probable than not that she would suffer future persecution); see also Nagoulko v. INS , 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (possibility of future persecution “too speculative”).

Substantial evidence also supports the conclusion that Tokramadzhyan failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of torture by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Armenian government. See Andrade-Garcia , 828 F.3d at 836- 37.

The government’s unopposed motion to supplement the administrative record (Docket Entry No. 14) is granted.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 15-71369

[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).