Gonzalez

MEMORANDUM ***

Sergio Arturo Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen deportation proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105 (a), and we deny the petition.

Gonzalez argues that the INS inappropriately used his asylum application as evidence to deport him, thus violating his due process rights. Gonzalez failed to raise this claim either before the immigration judge (“IJ”) or the BIA, and thereby failed to exhaust his administrative reme *771 dies. We therefore lack jurisdiction to review this claim. Farhoud v. INS, 122 F.3d 794, 796 (9th Cir.1997), citing Vargas v. INS, 831 F.2d 906, 907 (9th Cir.1987) (“[fjailure to raise an issue below constitutes failure to exhaust administrative remedies and ‘deprives this court of jurisdiction to hear the matter’ ”). It is of no consequence that a dissenting member of the BIA addressed this issue if the petitioner himself did not raise it. See Singh-Bhathal v. INS, 170 F.3d 943 , 947 (9th Cir.1999).

Gonzalez further contends that he is excused from the exhaustion of remedies requirement because the BIA cannot address…