Mei Kin Lee 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MEI KIN LEE,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74887
Agency No. A079-615-086
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 14, 2010**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges
Mei Kin Lee, a native and citizen of Malaysia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of her appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of
FILED
DEC 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
removal, relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), and voluntary
departure. We dismiss.
We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s adverse credibility determination
because Lee failed to raise the issue before the BIA and, thus, failed to exhaust her
administrative remedies. See Segura v. Holder, 605 F.3d 1063, 1065–66 (9th Cir.
2010); see also Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 930 (9th Cir. 2004) (“A petitioner
cannot satisfy the exhaustion requirement by making a general challenge to the IJ’s
decision, but, rather, must specify which issues form the basis of the appeal.”). As
a result, we need not consider Lee’s claims for asylum and withholding of removal
because the adverse credibility determination disposed of those claims. See Zara,
383 F.3d at 931. Lee similarly failed to exhaust her CAT claim before the BIA.
We also lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s decision to deny her request for
voluntary departure. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(f); Esquivel-Garcia v. Holder, 593 F.3d
1025, 1030 (9th Cir. 2010).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --