United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 16, 2003
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-60658
Summary Calendar
SAVUTH MOA; PAOV KONG,
Petitioners,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of Orders of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A77-251-694
BIA No. A77-251-685
--------------------
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Savuth Moa and his wife, Paov Kong, petition this court for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order denying
them asylum. They argue that the summary-affirmance procedure
employed by the BIA violates due process; however, this court has
rejected such argument. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830,
833 (5th Cir. 2003).
They also argue that the decision denying them asylum was not
supported by substantial evidence. However, they have not
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
presented evidence which compels a determination that they have a
well-founded fear of persecution based on Kong’s Chinese ancestry
or their political opposition to Communism. Nor have the couple
presented facts suggesting that the alleged problems they suffered
in the past, i.e, the “extraction” of money, were related to Kong’s
Chinese ancestry or their opposition to Communism. Because the
petitioners have not met their burden of showing that the denial of
asylum was not supported by substantial evidence, their petition is
DENIED. Faddoul v. INS, 37 F.3d 185, 188 (5th Cir. 1994).
The Respondent’s motion for summary affirmance of the BIA’s
decision and its various motions regarding briefing are DENIED as
unnecessary.
PETITION DENIED; ALL OUTSTANDING MOTIONS DENIED.
G:\opin-sc\02-60658.opn.wpd 2