Narinder Singh Bhullar v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

07-73079Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit14 juil. 2010

Texte intégral

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
NARINDER SINGH BHULLAR,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73079
Agency No. A079-289-750
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.
Narinder Singh Bhullar, 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
FILED
JUL 14 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-73079 2
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Husyev v.
Mukasey, 528 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the implausibility of Bhullar’s documents being prepared originally in
English, and of his hiding disguised as a Hindu monk although he was fluent in
Punjabi and spoke only a little Hindi. See Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738, 743
(9th Cir. 2007). In the absence of credible testimony, Bhullar’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
Because Bhullar’s CAT claim is based on the same statements found to be
not credible, and he does not point to any other evidence in the record that compels
the conclusion that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured if returned to
India, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT. See id. at
1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.