Gurpreet 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
GURPREET SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74686
Agency No. A078-965-104
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 17, 2012**
Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Gurpreet Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ 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
APR 25 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-74686 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), and we deny the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
because of inconsistencies between Singh’s testimony and the testimony of his
witness Gursharanjit Kaur Samra regarding his identity, particularly concerning his
Indian driver’s license. See id. In the absence of credible testimony regarding his
identity, Singh’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See id.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Singh failed to establish it is more likely than not that he will be tortured if
returned to India. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --