Case Name: Mohammed Bilal HOSSAIN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-11-18
Citations: 81 F. App'x 269
Docket Number: No. 02-73386
Parties: Mohammed Bilal HOSSAIN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 81
Pages: 269–270

Head Matter:
Mohammed Bilal HOSSAIN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 02-73386.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 10, 2003.
Decided Nov. 18, 2003.
Garish Sarin, Esq., Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, Lyle Jentzer, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, District Counsel, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Office of the District Counsel, Phoenix, AZ, for Respondent.
Before: KOZINSKI, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Mohammed Bilal Hossain, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming the Immigration Judge's ("IJ") denial of his applications for political asylum and withholding of deportation. The transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 apply, and we have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). See Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). We review the IJ's adverse credibility finding for substantial evidence, Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1149-50 (9th Cir.1999), and we deny the petition.
The IJ identified a material inconsistency between Hossain's testimony and his asylum application regarding whether he was arrested. Because this inconsistency goes to the heart of his asylum claim, substantial evidence supports the IJ's adverse credibility finding. See Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001). Accordingly, Hossain failed to establish eligibility for asylum or withholding of deportation. See Valderrama v. INS, 260 F.3d 1083, 1085 (9th Cir.2001).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition 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.