Oeyono

MEMORANDUM ***

Tuty Oeyono and Djoko Suharsono, husband and wife, are natives and citizens of Indonesia. They petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision, which summarily affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 .

Where, as here, the BIA affirms without an opinion, we review the IJ’s decision directly. Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence, Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1015 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The IJ made no express credibility finding. Taking all of the petitioners’ testimony as true, we conclude that the harm that Oeyono suffered did not rise to the level of past persecution. See Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 339-40 (9th Cir.1995); Ghaly v. INS, 58 F.3d 1425, 1431 (9th Cir.1995). In addition, substantial evidence also supports the conclusion that petitioners failed to demonstrate a well-founded fear of future persecution because they failed to show the “comparatively low” individualized risk…