Widjaja

MEMORANDUM *

The Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) streamlined decision affirmed, without opinion, the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of Widjaja’s asylum application. Therefore, the IJ’s decision is the final agency action for purposes of this appeal. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 851 (9th Cir.2003). The IJ’s determination that Widjaja is ineligible for asylum “can be reversed only if the evidence pre *666 sented by [Widjaja] was such that a reasonable factfinder would have to conclude that the requisite fear of persecution existed.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (citation omitted).

The incidents Widjaja described in her testimony and asylum application do not compel a finding of past persecution. See Li v. Ashcroft, 356 F.3d 1153, 1158 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc) (characterizing “persecution as an extreme concept, marked by the infliction of suffering or harm in a way regarded as offensive.”) (citation, alteration, and internal quotation marks omitted). Widjaja’s persecution claim is predicated upon two incidents. Widjaja suffered no physical harm, nor was she detained as a result of either incident. In the…