MEMORANDUM **

Alipate Ravatunawa Ratukalou and Oripa Saurara Ratukalou, natives and citizens of Fiji, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Tamang v. Holder, 598 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

The record does not compel the finding that petitioners established changed or extraordinary circumstances to excuse their untimely asylum application. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.4(a)(4), (5); Tamang, 598 F.3d at 1089-90 (setting forth requirements for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim). Accordingly, petitioners’ asylum claim fails.

The BIA found petitioners did not appeal the IJ’s denial of withholding of removal. Petitioners do not challenge this finding. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues which are not specifically raised and argued are deemed waived).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.