Singh v. Holder , 362 F. App'x 834 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FILED
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                           JAN 21 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    SARWAN SINGH,                                    No. 05-73248
    Petitioner,                        Agency No. A096-144-299
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted January 11, 2010 **
    Before:        BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    Sarwan 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
    *
    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).
    AR/Research
    protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
    under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s adverse
    credibility determination, Gui v. INS, 
    280 F.3d 1217
    , 1225 (9th Cir. 2002), and
    deny the petition for review.
    Even though the IJ erred in her one-year time bar finding, see Cinapian v.
    Holder, 
    567 F.3d 1067
    , 1073 (9th Cir. 2009) (“Where . . . the government alleges
    an alien’s arrival date in the Notice to Appear, and the alien admits the
    government’s allegation before the IJ, the allegations are considered judicial
    admissions rendering the arrival date undisputed.”), substantial evidence supports
    the IJ’s adverse credibility determination because Singh failed to establish
    sufficiently and affirmatively his identity, see Farah v. Ashcroft, 
    348 F.3d 1153
    ,
    1156 (9th Cir. 2003) (affirming negative credibility finding based on, inter alia,
    discrepancies regarding identity), and because the IJ made a specific and cogent
    demeanor finding, see Arulampalam v. Ashcroft, 
    353 F.3d 679
    , 686 (9th Cir.
    2003). In the absence of credible testimony, Singh failed to establish eligibility for
    asylum or withholding of removal. See 
    Farah, 348 F.3d at 1156
    .
    Singh waives any challenge to the IJ’s denial of relief under the CAT by
    failing to argue it in his opening brief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 
    94 F.3d 1256
    ,
    1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996).
    AR/Research                                2                                     05-73248
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    AR/Research                   3      05-73248