With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". we dismiss the petition with respect to this claim. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over petitioner’s remaining claims. We review for substantial evidence, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and we deny the claims. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s and BIA’s decision that petitioner failed to show that the government was unable or unwilling to control the Hindu fundamentalists who stoned her home. See Singh v. INS, 134 F.3d 962, 968 (9th Cir.1998). Because the police responded to petitioner’s request for help, came to her home and asked questions regarding the incidents, and later told her that they were looking into the matter, she fails to show that the government was unable or unwilling to control her perpetrators. See id. (<HOLDING>). Because petitioner failed to establish

A: holding that appellants fourteenth amendment due process claim did not require reversal where they failed to show that they were prejudiced
B: holding alien failed to show the government was unable or unwilling to control the attackers where police came to aliens location when they were called and no further action was taken which could have been due to a lack of suspects
C: holding that a remand should be limited to cases in which further action must be taken by the district court or in which the appellate court has no way open to it to affirm or reverse the district courts action under review
D: holding district court order of restitution failed for lack of proof when government failed to meet burden
B.