Tajuddin Pyarali Surani, Laila Tajuddin Surani, Zohra Tajuddin Surani, and Naila Surani petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ’s) decision to deny their applications for asylum, and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), and withholding of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).

The Suranis contend that the BIA’s procedure of summarily affirming the IJ’s decision without opinion violated their due process rights. This argument is without merit. Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 832-33 (5th Cir. 2003).

The Suranis also assert that the IJ overlooked their showing of past persecution and so erroneously held them to the “more likely than not” standard of 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b)(l)(iii). The three incidents outlined in the Suranis’ testimony before the IJ do not constitute past persecution. See Mikhael v. INS, 115 F.3d 299, 304 & n. 4 (5th Cir. 1997). Hence, the record does not compel a conclusion contrary to the BIA’s determination. See Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194, 195 (5th Cir. 1996).

PETITION DENIED.