Avtar 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
AVTAR SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73918
Agency No. A072-404-211
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.
Avtar 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 review for
FILED
JAN 10 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-73918 2
substantial evidence, Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 998 (9th Cir.
2003), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that, even if Singh
established a well-founded fear of persecution, the government established by a
preponderance of the evidence that Singh could reasonably relocate withing India.
See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(3(ii); Sowe v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1281, 1287 (9th Cir.
2008). Accordingly, Singh’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See
Gonzalez-Hernandez, at 1001.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Singh failed to demonstrate that it was more likely than not he would be tortured if
returned to India. See Hasan v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 1114, 1122-23 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --