Case Name: Vahan NAVASERDIAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-02-11
Citations: 120 F. App'x 736
Docket Number: No. 03-73831; Agency No. A75-663-786
Parties: Vahan NAVASERDIAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before FERNANDEZ, GRABER and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 120
Pages: 736–737

Head Matter:
Vahan NAVASERDIAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-73831.
Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 7, 2005.
Decided Feb. 11, 2005.
Vahan Navaserdian, Glendale, CA, pro se.
Regional Counsel, Western Region, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, David V. Bernal, Attorney, Regina Byrd, Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before FERNANDEZ, GRABER and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Vahan Navaserdian, a native and citizen of Iran, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We dismiss the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the LPs adverse credibility determination because Navaserdian failed raise this issue before the BIA and, thus, failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
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.