” Alhaj v. Holder, 576 F.3d 533, 539 (6th Cir.2009) (citation omitted). Fahmy argues that detainees in Egypt face torture. However, he has not established that it is more likely than not that Egyptian authorities will detain him. There is simply no evidence in the record that Egyptian authorities respond to mental illness through incarceration rather than treatment. Even if Fahmy were detained, there is no evidence in the record that Egyptian authorities target mentally ill inmates for torture. Although prison conditions in Egypt may be poor, the reports in the record do not indicate that mentally ill inmates are singled out for torture for discriminatory reasons or as a form of punishment. See Lysaire v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 368 Fed.Appx. 329, 331 (3d Cir.2010) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); Cherichel v. Holder, 591 F.3d 1002, 1017 (8th
holding that the petitioner with mental illness did not qualify for relief under the cat because all detainees experienced terrible prison conditions which were not targeted at mentally ill people holding that beyond evidence of inhumane prison conditions a cat claimant must provide some evidence that the authorities act with the specific intent to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering on those detained holding that the statute that provides for a verdict of guilty but mentally ill does not preclude a death sentence as the result of such a verdict holding substantial evidence supported the denial of cat relief where the petitioners cat claim was based on the same testimony the ij found not credible and the petitioner pointed to no other evidence that the ij should have considered holding that the petitioner did not establish grounds for withholding of removal because the alleged persecution appears to be a simple lack of resources for the mentally hi in guyana not an intent on the part of the government to persecute mentally ill persons