Case Name: Sohail Mohammad SYED, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-27
Citations: 172 F. App'x 569
Docket Number: No. 05-60075
Parties: Sohail Mohammad SYED, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 172
Pages: 569–570

Head Matter:
Sohail Mohammad SYED, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-60075.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided March 27, 2006.
Sohail Mohammad Syed, Kingwood, TX, pro se.
Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Shelley R. Goad, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, John Clifford Cunningham, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Hipólito Acosta, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Houston, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, District Directors Office, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.
Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, pro se.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Sohail Mohammad Syed petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). This court lacks jurisdiction to consider the denial of Syed's application for asylum because the BIA denied the application as untimely. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(8).
Syed does not challenge the adverse credibility finding which formed the basis for the denial of his applications for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). He has therefore abandoned any such challenge. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.1993); see also Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir.2003).
PETITION DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.