Jao

MEMORANDUM **

Ronny Immanuel Jao, his wife and two adult children, all natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and we deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that petitioners did not estab *522 lish past persecution because the Indonesian government was willing and able to protect Jao from the native Indonesians who beat him twice after attempting to extort money from him. See Nahrvani v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2005). Substantial evidence also supports the Id’s conclusion that petitioners did not establish past persecution, because the sexual harassment endured by Hana Jao was not persecution, see Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1016-17 (9th Cir.2003), and because the vandalism to petitioners’ house and car during the May 1998 riots also did not constitute persecution, see Rostomian v. INS, 210…