
    Mazen I. JEWAINAT, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 05-76791.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 26, 2008
    
    Filed Sept. 4, 2008.
    Elias Z. Shamieh, Esquire, Law Offices of Elias Z. Shamieh, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    John Hogan, Senior Litigation Counsel, Oil, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: SCHROEDER, KLEINFELD, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Mazen Jewainat, a native and citizen of Jordan, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing whether substantial evidence supports a finding by clear and convincing evidence that Jewainat is removable, Nakamoto v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 874, 882 (9th Cir.2004), we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s decision finding Jewainat removable because the record shows he was admitted on a visitor visa in September 1983 and never obtained lawful permanent resident status. The government submitted evidence that Jewainat’s application for adjustment of status was denied on May 30, 1985. In addition, the government’s expert witness explained that the presence of several documents in Jewainat’s file indicated that Jewainat could not have been admitted in December 1984. The IJ therefore properly found Jewainat removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B). See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(3)(A).

Jewainat’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     