Ranvir Singh v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RANVIR SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74266
Agency No. A074-794-376
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Ranvir Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
FILED
JUL 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74266 2
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review legal issues de novo, including due process
claims. Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny the petition
for review.
Singh contends that the agency violated due process because portions of the
hearing transcript allegedly are missing from the record. We reject this contention
both because Singh has not shown that any proceedings occurred on the dates in
question and because, even if such proceedings occurred, he failed to demonstrate
prejudice. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error
and prejudice for a petitioner to prevail on a due process claim).
Apart from his due process contention, Singh does not otherwise challenge
the BIA’s denial of his asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT claims.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --