Case Name: Hardev SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-05-15
Citations: 181 F. App'x 628
Docket Number: No. 04-72393
Parties: Hardev SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 181
Pages: 628–628

Head Matter:
Hardev SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 04-72393.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 15, 2006.
Decided May 15, 2006.
Hardev Singh, New York, NY, pro se.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, William C. Peachey, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Offiee of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Hardev Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions pro se for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals summarily affirming an immigration judge's ("IJ") order denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review.
Singh's opening brief does not contain any argument regarding the IJ's findings that he lacked credibility, that he failed to establish a nexus between his support for the Shiromani Akali Dal Mann and his arrest, and that he did not have a well-founded fear of future persecution. Accordingly, he has waived any challenge to the IJ's grounds for denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (holding that issues which are not specifically raised and argued in a party's opening brief are waived). Singh also fails to address, and therefore waives, his claim for relief under the Convention Against Torture. See id.
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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.