Sheviakov

MEMORANDUM

Petitioners appeal the Board of Immigration Appeal’s (“BIA”) dismissal of their appeal for Asylum and Withholding of Deportation. The petition was timely, and we have jurisdiction.

Petitioners’ argue that the Immigration Judge (IJ) erred by relying exclusively on the State Department Report. The IJ has discretion, however, to rely exclusively on country reports.

Petitioners next argue that they were not given a reasonable opportunity to present evidence because the INS objected to some of their questions as leading and the IJ sustained the objections. But there is no showing of a violation of the due process clause or any administrative regula *878 tion or established authority that would furnish a basis for relief.

Petitioners also complain that the IJ denied them a continuance. The decision whether to grant a continuance is in the sound discretion of the trial judge and will not be overturned except on a showing of clear abuse. 5 Counsel had several months to prepare the case, and petitioners have not made a showing of clear abuse.

Finally, petitioners argue that the IJ’s decision that they did not face past persecution and have a well-founded fear of…