NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 4 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DEVINDER SINGH, No. 15-72602 Petitioner, Agency No. A200-941-154 v. MEMORANDUM* ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 2, 2021** Seattle, Washington Before: GRABER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. Petitioner Devinder Singh timely seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ ("BIA") dismissal of his appeal of an immigration judge’s ("IJ") denial of relief from removal. Reviewing the agency’s factual findings for substantial evidence, Mukulumbutu v. Barr, 977 F.3d 924, 925 (9th Cir. 2020), we deny the * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). petition. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. During the merits hearing, Petitioner testified that he fled India because his father, who held the same political views as Petitioner, had been beaten so badly that he died and Petitioner feared the same fate. But during his credible-fear interview, given under oath and with the assistance of an interpreter, Petitioner stated that he did not know of anyone in his political party who had been harmed, and he did not mention his father’s death. See Mukulumbutu, 977 F.3d at 926 (holding that a credible-fear interview may be considered when there are "sufficient indicia of reliability," such as when "the interviews were conducted under oath, with contemporaneous notes containing the questions asked, and transcribed . . . with the aid of an interpreter"). Contrary to Petitioner’s inexplicable assertion on appeal, the typed, coherent notes from the credible-fear interview are neither "unreadable" nor "illegible." Neither the BIA nor the IJ was required to believe Petitioner’s confusing explanation for why, during the credible-fear interview, he did not mention his father’s death. Moreover, the agency permissibly concluded that the documentary evidence cast doubt on Petitioner’s claim about the beating of his father. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that, without credible testimony, the remaining evidence in the record is insufficient to establish 2 eligibility for asylum, humanitarian asylum, withholding of removal, or relief under the Convention Against Torture. Petition DENIED. 3 15-72602 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Devinder Singh v. Robert Wilkinson 4 February 2021 Agency Unpublished 63d57be206527823bfee80e8e0312be253c1d03c
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals