Case Name: Shamsun Nahar IQBAL; Sami Jony Iqbal, Petitioners, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-02-17
Citations: 121 F. App'x 281
Docket Number: No. 03-71049; Agency Nos. A75-691-627, A75-691-004
Parties: Shamsun Nahar IQBAL; Sami Jony Iqbal, Petitioners, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before KOZINSKI and TROTT, Circuit Judges, and SAND, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 121
Pages: 281–282

Head Matter:
Shamsun Nahar IQBAL; Sami Jony Iqbal, Petitioners, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-71049. Agency Nos. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ], [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 14, 2005.
Decided Feb. 17, 2005.
Ahmed M. Abdallah, Esq., Attorney at Law, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioners.
Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Richard M. Evans, Esq., Timothy P. Mcllmail, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before KOZINSKI and TROTT, Circuit Judges, and SAND, District Judge.
Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General. See Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Honorable Leonard B. Sand, Senior United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Substantial evidence supports the immigration judge's determination that petitioners failed to provide credible evidence showing their eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000). Substantial evidence also supports the immigration judge's finding that petitioners did not establish that they were entitled to protection under the Convention Against Torture. See Lanza v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 917, 936 (9th Cir.2004).
DENIED.
pjjg ¿iSpOSjtion is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.