UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1660 EBRIMA SANYANG, Petitioner, versus U. S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE; JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A75-367-787) Submitted: January 8, 2003 Decided: January 30, 2003 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joshua A. Moses, JOSHUA MOSES & ASSOCIATES, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Robert D. McCallum, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Donald E. Keener, Deputy Director, Linda S. Wernery, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigation Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ebrima Sanyang, a native and citizen of the Gambia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) summarily affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. The IJ concluded Sanyang failed to present sufficient evidence to show past persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of a protected ground that would make him eligible for asylum relief. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (2000); 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A) (2000). The Board’s decision to grant or deny asylum relief is conclusive “unless manifestly contrary to law” and an abuse of discretion. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(C) & (D) (2000). We find the Board correctly applied the law and did not abuse its discretion in rendering its decision here. Therefore, we affirm the reasoning of the Board. Sanyang v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Serv., BIA No. A75-367-787 (B.I.A. May. 30, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2