Juma

MEMORANDUM **

Khadija Mahamud Juma petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA’s”) affirmance of the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ’s”) denial of her application for asylum. 1 We deny the petition because we conclude that Juma waived the issue on appeal.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(1). Although the IJ granted Juma’s application for withholding of removal to Somalia, he denied her application for asylum and for withholding of removal to Kenya. See INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 U.S. 415, 419 , 119 S.Ct. 1439 , 143 L.Ed.2d 590 (1999) (“[Wjithholding only bars deporting an alien to a particular country or countries”). The BIA affirmed the denial of asylum and withholding of removal to Kenya in a final order, and we therefore have jurisdiction over this petition for review.

Although we have jurisdiction, we deny the petition. Initially, Juma petitioned for review of the mandatory denial of her application for asylum due to her alleged firm resettlement in Kenya. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (b)(2)(A)(vi). However, the *624 BIA did not affirm the IJ’s mandatory denial of asylum, but rather affirmed the IJ’s discretionary denial of Juma’s application for…