SINGH v. BARR (2019)

MEMORANDUM ***

Harjinder 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 decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition for review.

We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039–40 (9th Cir. 2010). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on Singh’s demeanor and inconsistencies in his testimony and the documentary evidence regarding the April 2010 attack. See id. Contrary to Singh’s contentions, the agency provided specific examples in the record and a sufficient explanation to support its finding that his demeanor indicated a lack of credibility. See Huang v. Holder, 744 F.3d 1149, 1155–56 (9th Cir. 2014). Further, the record demonstrates that the agency considered Singh’s explanations regarding the discrepancies in his testimony and documentary evidence but found the explanations unpersuasive. In the absence of credible testimony, Singh’s claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156–57 (9th Cir. 2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.