Knaryan

MEMORANDUM **

Hakob Knaryan and his wife, Gohar Zaheyan, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) opinion which affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of 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 directly the IJ’s decision. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence and may reverse only if the evidence compels such a result. See INS v. Elias-Zacari-as, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We deny the petition for review.

Petitioners contend that the BIA violated due process because it summarily affirmed the IJ’s decision. This contention is unpersuasive. See Falcon Carriche, 350 F.3d at 849-52 .

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that petitioners failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on an enumerated ground. See Rostomian v. INS, 210 F.3d 1088, 1089 (9th Cir.2000) (concluding *599 that…