Opinion
No. 05-74925.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed May 22, 2008.
Inna Lipkin, Esq., Law Offices of Inna Lipkin, Redwood City, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Anthony V. Teelucksingh, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Criminal Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A79-583-027.
Before: PREGERSON, TASHIMA, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Narinder Pal Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration's ("BIA") dismissal of his appeal from an Immigration Judge's order denying asylum. We dismiss the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the determination that Singh's asylum application was untimely because that determination turns on a disputed question of fact. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 650 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Singh's contentions regarding changed circumstances, extraordinary circumstances, and alleged due process violations by the IJ because Singh failed to exhaust them before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).