Touray

MEMORANDUM ***

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Omar Kumbam *622 ang Touray failed to establish that he filed his asylum application within one year of his arrival in the United States. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 1218, 1221-22 (9th Cir. 2005).

To qualify for withholding of removal, Mr. Touray must show that it is more likely than not that, if removed to The Gambia or Russia, his life or freedom would be threatened on account of a protected ground. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (b)(3)(A); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16 (b). To meet this burden, it is not enough that Mr. Touray has a well-founded fear of persecution. See INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 , 107 S.Ct. 1207 , 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987). Instead, Mr. Touray must show that there is a “clear probability” of future persecution. See id.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of withholding as to both The Gambia and Russia. Mr. Touray failed to show a clear probability of future persecution in The Gambia because, as the BIA found, he “did not suffer past harm there, and most of his large, similarly situated family has remained there unharmed since 1996.” Mr. Touray also…