Sarabjit 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
SARABJIT SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73293
Agency No. A096-165-814
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Sarabjit Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal,
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
FILED
SEP 28 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-73293 2
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 IJ’s adverse credibility determination
based on inconsistencies regarding when Singh and his mother were arrested and
released from detention, and the circumstances surrounding Singh’s alleged
medical treatment, and these inconsistencies go to the heart of Singh’s claim. See
Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 964 (9th Cir. 2004). In the absence of credible
testimony, 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 testimony the IJ found not
credible, and he points to no other evidence to show it is more likely than not he
would be tortured if returned to India, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --