Parvinder Kaur v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PARVINDER KAUR,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73009
Agency No. A095-576-861
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Parvinder Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum and
FILED
SEP 30 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-73009 2
withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny
the petition for review.
The BIA adopted and affirmed the IJ’s decision including the IJ’s adverse
credibility determination. See Abebe v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 1037, 1040 (9th Cir.
2005) (en banc) (where the BIA cites its decision in Matter of Burbano, 20 I. & N.
Dec. 872 (BIA 1994), and does not express any disagreement with any part of the
IJ’s decision, the BIA adopts the IJ’s decision in its entirety).
In her opening brief, Kaur fails to raise any challenge to the agency’s
dispositive adverse credibility determination. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94
F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued are
deemed waived). Accordingly, Kaur’s asylum and withholding of removal claims
fail.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --