Neha Pradeepkumar Tailor has petitioned for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the denial of her application for withholding of removal under the Immigration and nationality Act (INA).

Tailor applied for withholding of removal because of a fear of persecution based on her “membership in a particular social group.” Tailor contends that the evidence establishes that it is more likely than not that she would be persecuted if removed to India. Specifically, she contends that she would be denied employment and educational opportunities because she is a “westernized woman” and fears that she “might” be forced to marry instead of al *409 lowed to pursue an education if she is removed to India. 2

The Immigration Judge (IJ) found that although Tailor presented a credible application for relief, she failed to establish her burden of showing that it is more likely than not that she would be persecuted based upon her membership in a particular group. In finding that Tailor was not entitled to withholding of removal, the IJ concluded that he was “unaware of any law relating to gender based discrimination in education and employment that qualifies one for asylum or withholding of removal.” Tailor failed to address or challenge this finding before the BIA, or in her brief in support of her petition for review.

Because Tailor has failed to address this finding, which is critical to a determination of her entitlement to relief under section 1231, she has waived any challenge to that finding. See Calderon-Ontiveros v. INS, 809 F.2d 1050, 1052 (5th Cir. 1986). 3

Accordingly, Tailor’s petition is

DENIED.