Jagtar 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).
RA/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAGTAR SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-70432
Agency No. A076-676-494
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.
Jagtar Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision terminating a prior grant of asylum and denying his application
FILED
FEB 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

RA/Research 06-70432 2
for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against
Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
substantial evidence, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir. 2001), and
we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s termination of asylum and
adverse credibility finding based upon Singh’s submission of fraudulent receipts
purportedly confirming that he donated money to the All India Sikh Student
Federation. See Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741, 745 (9th Cir. 2004) (fraudulent
documents going to the heart of the claim may justify an adverse credibility
finding); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1208.24(f). Therefore, Singh’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
Because Singh’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony the agency
found not credible, and he points to not other evidence demonstrating a likelihood
of torture, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief. See id.
at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --