NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 21a0303n.06 Case No. 20-4173 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Jun 29, 2021 DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) RAJWINDER SINGH, ) Petitioner, ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ) FROM THE UNITED STATES v. ) ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION ) APPEALS MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, ) Respondent. ) OPINION ) BEFORE: SUTTON, Chief Judge; COLE and READLER, Circuit Judges. COLE, Circuit Judge. Rajwinder Singh petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. The BIA found that Singh had failed to sustain his burden of proof on his claims. Because this decision is supported by substantial evidence, we deny Singh’s petition. I. Rajwinder Singh is an Indian citizen and member of the Sikh religious community who entered the United States without admission or inspection in January 2003. Singh applied for asylum on multiple grounds, stating that he had been arrested, harassed, and beaten repeatedly by police in his home district in the Indian state of Punjab. In June 2008, the Department of Homeland Security filed a notice to appear against Singh, charging him as being removable under section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Immigration and National Act (“INA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i), as an Case No. 20-4173, Singh v. Garland alien present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled. In consecutive hearings before the immigration court in 2009 and 2010, Singh conceded his removability and requested asylum, withholding of removal under the INA and under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), or, in the alternative, permission for voluntary departure. At his March 2011 removal hearing, Singh specified through counsel that his asylum claim rested on grounds of persecution for his political opinion and religion. Speaking in Punjabi through an interpreter, Singh testified that he was a native of Punjab and made his living there as a truck driver. In 1999, Singh joined a Sikh political party that advocated for the interests of Sikh farmers. Singh stated that his affiliation with the party made him a target of abusive arrests, detentions, and beatings by the local police on at least three occasions, which Singh detailed for the Immigration Judge (“IJ”). According to Singh, none of these incidents resulted in formal complaints or judicial proceedings in which he participated. After the last of these incidents in 2002, and faced with continued harassment and threats to his life by members of an opposing political party, Singh decided to flee to the United States. He testified that he fears going back to India because the police continue to seek him out, harass his family, and maintain an open file against him. In addition to his testimony, Singh submitted three pieces of noteworthy corroborative evidence to support his requested relief. One was a letter dated July 20, 2010, from Singh’s “legal consultant,” a local Punjabi attorney, who wrote that Singh’s “life and liberty [are] not safe here in India.” (A.R. 000452.) The …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals