Case Name: Tesfaye Dawit GEBREMESKEL; Daniel Dawit Gebremeskel; Selamawit Gebremeskel; Samiel Dawit Gebremeskel, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-10-19
Citations: 111 F. App'x 290
Docket Number: No. 03-60666
Parties: Tesfaye Dawit GEBREMESKEL; Daniel Dawit Gebremeskel; Selamawit Gebremeskel; Samiel Dawit Gebremeskel, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 111
Pages: 290–291

Head Matter:
Tesfaye Dawit GEBREMESKEL; Daniel Dawit Gebremeskel; Selamawit Gebremeskel; Samiel Dawit Gebremeskel, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-60666.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 19, 2004.
Joyce A Shatteen, Dallas, TX, for Petitioner.
Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Hillel Smith, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Terri Jane Scadron, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Di vision Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
John Ashcroft, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service District Directors Office, New Orleans, LA, pro se.
Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Tesfaye Dawit Gebremeskel, Daniel Dawit Gebremeskel, Selamawit Gebremeskel, and Samiel Dawit Gebremeskel, who are Ethiopians of Eritrean descent, petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the decision of the Immigration Judge (IJ) denying them asylum, withholding of deportation, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. They contend that the BIA's use of streamlined procedures, affirming the IJ's decision without opinion, deprived them of their right to an administrative appeal and amounted to mass-production appellate review; that the BIA erred by affirming the IJ's decision rejecting their asylum and withholding-of-deportation claims; and that the BIA erred by affirming the IJ's decision rejecting them relief under the Convention Against Torture. We deny the petition for review for the following reasons.
First, the BIA's summary-affirmance procedures "do not deprive this court of a basis for judicial review and . do not violate due process." Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir.2003). Second, the Gebremeskels have failed to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution on any ground if they were to return to Ethiopia. See Faddoul v. INS, 37 F.3d 185, 188 (5th Cir.1994). Third, the Gebremeskels have failed to demonstrate any likelihood of torture were they to return to Ethiopia. See Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899 (5th Cir.2002).
PETITION DENIED.
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.