Badar Siddiqi petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA) decision denying asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). As to his asylum application, Siddiqi seeks to challenge the BIA’s determination that his application was untimely under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B). This court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Siddiqi’s asylum application was untimely. See § 1158(a)(3). The petition for review is thus DISMISSED as to the asylum claim.

Siddiqi argues that the BIA erred in denying his application for withholding of removal. Siddiqi fails to demonstrate that the alleged isolated incidents of mistreatment or his status as a young, male Muhajir establish a “clear probability” that he would be persecuted upon his return to Pakistan. This court has held that similar allegations of mistreatment do not rise to the level of persecution. See, e.g., Abdel-Masieh v. INS, 73 F.3d 579, 584 (5th Cir. 1996); Fleurinor v. INS, 585 F.2d 129, 132 (5th Cir. 1978). Because the immigration judge’s findings are supported by substantial evidence and the evidence does not compel a contrary conclusion, the petition for review is DENIED. See Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996); Chun v. INS, 40 F.3d 76, 78 (5th Cir. 1994).

Siddiqi does not brief the BIA’s denial of relief under the CAT. Accordingly, Siddiqi has waived the claim. See Rodriguez v. INS, 9 F.3d 408, 414 n. 15 (5th Cir. 1993).

PETITION DISMISSED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.