Satnam 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
SATNAM SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-73866
Agency No. A078-657-017
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 10, 2012 **
Before: HUG, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Satnam Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of a Board
of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for protection under the Convention
FILED
JAN 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-73866 2
Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the
petition for review.
Singh contends that the BIA failed to state its reasons and show proper
consideration of all factors and probative evidence concerning country conditions
when denying relief under the Convention Against Torture. This contention is
belied by the record, which reflects that the court properly considered all the
relevant evidence. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(3); Cole v. Holder, 659 F.3d 762, 771-
72 (9th Cir. 2011); Kamalthas v. INS, 251 F.3d 1279, 1282 (9th Cir. 2001).
To the extent Singh challenges the BIA’s February 8, 2007 order denying
asylum and withholding of removal, we note that this court previously rejected
those contentions in Singh v. Holder, 349 Fed.Appx. 237 (9th Cir. 2009), and we
decline to reconsider them. See Merritt v. Mackey, 932 F.2d 1317, 1320 (9th Cir.
1991).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --