Corona-Sandoval

MEMORANDUM **

Rafael Corona-Sandoval, his wife and daughter, all natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, see Meza-Manay v. INS, 139 F.3d 759, 762 (9th Cir.1998), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that being a victim of random crime by armed men does not support an asylum claim. See Gormley v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.2004) (“Random, isolated criminal acts perpetrated by anonymous thieves do not establish persecution.”). Nor can the frustration of the police at Corona-Sandoval’s refusal to cooperate in the investigation of his victimization support such a claim. See Prasad v. INS, 101 F.3d 614, 617 (9th Cir.1996) (stating what is required in order to demonstrate past persecution).

Finally, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary determination that petitioner did not qualify for cancellation of removal…