
    Shanni KUMAR, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-70603.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 8, 2003.
    
    Decided Dec. 11, 2003.
    Suzanne B. Friedman, Esq., Law Offices of Suzanne B. Friedman, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Lagu-na Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Patricia L. Buchanan, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Richard M. Evans, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and MCKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Shanni Kumar, a native and citizen of Fiji, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition for review.

Kumar filed a Notice of Appeal (Form EOIR — 26) with the BIA indicating his intent to file a brief, then failed to file a brief. Summary dismissal was appropriate because Kumar’s Notice of Appeal did not sufficiently specify his grounds for appeal. See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 814, 821 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     