Janak 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JANAK SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74202
Agency No. A090-004-557
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Janak Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming an immigration judge’s removal order.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law,
FILED
JUN 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74202 2
Aguilar Gonzalez v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 1204, 1208 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny
the petition for review.
We reject Singh’s contention that the Department of Homeland Security
(“DHS”) violated the confidentiality provisions of the Immigration Reform and
Control Act of 1986, 8 U.S.C. § 1255a(c)(5), by reviewing Singh’s legalization
application before initiating proceedings against him. It is undisputed that DHS
discovered Singh’s identity and non-citizen status during a raid that was unrelated
to his legalization application. DHS did not violate the confidentiality provision
when it subsequently verified the denial of Singh’s legalization application. See 8
U.S.C. § 1255a(c)(5)(D)(i) (information derived from the legalization application
that is not available from any other source, other than information furnished by an
applicant, may be used for the purposes of immigration enforcement).
Singh’s remaining contention lacks merit.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --