
    Thol KONG, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 05-72688.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 3, 2007.
    
    Filed Dec. 18, 2007.
    Timothy M. Greene, Esq., Greene & Lloyd, PLLC, Puyallup, WA, for Petitioner.
    Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Office of the District Counsel, Edward Himmelfarb, Seattle, WA, Anthony J. Steinmeyer, Esq., Edward Himmelfarb, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Appellate Staff, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      
         The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Thol Kong, a native and citizen of Cambodia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision which affirmed the Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence and may reverse only if the evidence compels such a result. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence, taken as a whole, supports the BIA’s credibility finding. The evidence does not compel a contrary conclusion. See id. In the absence of credible evidence, Kong has failed to show eligibility for asylum or withholding. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Kong’s request for attorney’s fees is denied.

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