Sukhvinder Singh Pelia 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
SUKHVINDER SINGH PELIA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71612
Agency No. A096-133-339
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2011**
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Sukhvinder Singh Pelia, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of
a Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal,
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
FILED
FEB 24 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

07-71612 2
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings.
Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). We deny the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the testimony of Boota Singh Basi that the application he prepared for
Pelia contained a fabricated claim of persecution and based on the IJ’s observations
of Pelia’s demeanor. See Fernandes v. Holder, 619 F.3d 1069, 1075 (9th Cir.
2010) (Basi was not a biased witness because he was under no obligation to
cooperate); Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1151 (9th Cir. 1999) (special
deference given to IJ’s demeanor finding). We reject Pelia’s contention that the IJ
failed to analyze the credibility and reliability of the affidavits and letters he
submitted in support of his application. See Kin v. Holder, 595 F.3d 1050, 1058
(9th Cir. 2010) (it is appropriate for an IJ to examine conflicting evidence and
determine the truth); Almaghzar v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 915, 921-22 (9th Cir. 2006)
(the IJ does not need to comment specifically on all the evidence). In the absence
of credible testimony, Pelia’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See
Farah, 348 F.3d at 1156.

-- 2 of 3 --

07-71612 3
Because Pelia’s CAT claim is based on the testimony the agency found not
credible, and he points to no evidence showing it is more likely than not he will be
tortured if returned to India, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --