Woy

MEMORANDUM **

Eldridge Woy, and his wife and son, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under *726 the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Nag oulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1015 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA denied petitioners’ asylum application as time barred. Petitioners do not challenge this finding.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that petitioners’ experiences of threats, discrimination, and harassment do not rise to the level of past persecution. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1059-60 (9th Cir.2009). Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s determination that petitioners failed to establish a clear probability of persecution because, even if the disfavored group analysis set forth in Sael v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 922, 927-29 (9th Cir.2004) applies to petitioners, Seventh Day Adventist Christians, they have not demonstrated the…