Asmita Nanasia, a native and citizen of India, petitions this court to review the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upholding the decision of the immigration judge (IJ) denying her application for withholding of removal. Nanasia argues that given her credible testimony and the documentary evidence depicting the persecution of Muslims by Hindu extremists, a reasonable person in her circumstance would fear persecution if returned to India.

We conclude from a review of the record that the BIA’s determination is supported by substantial evidence, and the record does not compel a conclusion contrary to the BIA’s denial of withholding of removal. See Eduard v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 182, 193 (5th Cir. 2004); Chun v. INS, 40 F.3d 76, 78 (5th Cir. 1994); 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b). Nanasia does not challenge the finding that her asylum application was untimely filed nor the finding that she is not entitled to protection under the Convention Against Torture. Thus, these claims are deemed abandoned. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED.