Case Name: Mohammad Aliuddin KHAN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-05-14
Citations: 97 F. App'x 166
Docket Number: No. 02-73513
Parties: Mohammad Aliuddin KHAN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 97
Pages: 166–166

Head Matter:
Mohammad Aliuddin KHAN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 02-73513.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted April 15, 2004.
Decided May 14, 2004.
Allan A. Samson, Esq., San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Julia K. Doig, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Keith Bernstein, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: WALLACE, KOZINSKI and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The IJ did not err in rejecting petitioner's application for asylum and withholding of removal because substantial evidence supports the IJ's finding that petitioner was not credible. Pal v. INS, 204 F.3d 935, 938 (9th Cir.2000).
Nor did the BIA's decision to streamline petitioner's case violate due process, Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 852 (9th Cir.2003), or contravene 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(a)(7).
Petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claim fails because petitioner did not raise it below. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A).
PETITION 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.