Pathak

MEMORANDUM **

Sanjeev Kumar Pathak, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1015 (9th Cir.2003), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s determination that Pathak failed to establish extraordinary circumstances to excuse the untimely filing of his asylum application because the underlying facts are disputed. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3); cf. Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 653-54 (9th Cir.2007) (per curiam). Because Pathak did not raise to the BIA his contention that the IJ applied an improper legal standard when assessing the timeliness of his asylum application, it is unex-hausted and we lack jurisdiction to review it. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir.2004).

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s denial of withholding of removal, because Pathak’s…