Singh
Singh v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
Appellant Jagdeep Singh (“Petitioner”) petitions for review of the Board of Immigration’s (“BIA”) denial of asylum and withholding of removal. The facts and proceedings are known to the parties and are only repeated here as necessary. The panel reviews for substantial evidence the factual findings underlying the BIA’s determination that Petitioner did not qualify for asylum or withholding of removal. Ze-hatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 *708 (9th Cir.2006) (citation omitted). This standard is highly deferential. Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1018 (9th Cir.2006). Under the substantial evidence standard, “ ‘administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.’ ” Zehatye, 453 F.3d at 1185 (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b)(4)(B)). The court determines its own jurisdiction de novo. Rosales-Rosales v. Ashcroft, 347 F.3d 714, 716 (9th Cir.2003).
This court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Singh is ineligible for asylum because he provided material support to terrorists. 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (b)(2)(A)(v); 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(3)(B)(i)(I); see also Bellout v. Ashcroft, 363…