Ranjit 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).
EN/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RANJIT SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73073
Agency No. A096-487-620
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Ranjit 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 (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
FILED
MAR 05 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

EN/Research 07-73073 2
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Where, as here, the BIA reviews de novo the
IJ’s decision, our review is limited to the decision of the BIA. Garcia-Quintero v.
Gonzales, 455 F.3d 1006, 1011 (9th Cir. 2006). We review for substantial
evidence, Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1018 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the
petition.
The BIA denied Singh’s petition for asylum and withholding of removal,
finding that, even assuming Singh had proven past persecution on account of a
protected ground, the Government had successfully rebutted the presumption of a
well-founded fear of future persecution by demonstrating changed country
conditions. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding. See
Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 1000 (9th Cir. 2003).
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of Singh’s CAT claim
because he failed to establish it was more likely than not that he would be tortured
if he returned to India. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(3)(ii); Singh v. Gonzales, 439
F.3d 1100, 1113 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --