Case Name: Amarjit SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-11-09
Citations: 205 F. App'x 540
Docket Number: No. 04-71079
Parties: Amarjit SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: KLEINFELD and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and WHALEY , District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 205
Pages: 540–541

Head Matter:
Amarjit SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 04-71079.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 19, 2006.
Filed Nov. 9, 2006.
Vinay R. Chari, Esq., Law Offices of Virender Kumar Goswami, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Clare E. Connors, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Prince Kuhio Federal Building, Honolulu, HI, for Respondent.
Before: KLEINFELD and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and WHALEY , District Judge.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Honorable Robert H. Whaley, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Washington, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Amarjit Singh petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals's dismissal of his asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture claims. The immigration judge pretermitted Singh's asylum claim as untimely without exceptional circumstances and denied his withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture claims as not credible. The Board of Immigration Appeals adopted the immigration judge's finding of facts, affirmed the immigration judge's decision, and dismissed Singh's appeal. This court lacks jurisdiction to review the Board of Immigration Appeals's dismissal of an appeal of an asylum application as untimely without exceptional circumstances, and sufficient evidence supports the immigration judge's adverse credibility determination.
The petition is DENIED.
xhiS 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.
. 8U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3).