Case ID: f-appx_515/html/0697-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jaspal SINGH, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 08-74062.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 17, 2013.
    
    Filed April 19, 2013.
    Ashwani K. Bhakhri, Joseph John Si-guenza, Esquire, Law Offices of Ashwani K. Bhakhri, Burlingame, CA, for Petitioner.
    Sharon Michele Clay, Esquire, Trial, OIL, Richard M. Evans, Esquire, Assistant Director, Richard Zanfardino, Trial, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, and GRABER and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

In this post-REAL ID Act case, Petitioner Jaspal Singh seeks review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) that adopts an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) ruling, which denied his claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. “Where, as here, the BIA adopts the IJ’s decision while adding some of its own reasoning, we review both decisions.” Lopez-Cardona v. Holder, 662 F.3d 1110, 1111 (9th Cir.2011). The IJ found, and the BIA affirmed, that Singh was not credible. Because the record does not compel a contrary conclusion, we deny the petition. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (“[Ajdministrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary....”).

The IJ had authority to require reasonably obtainable corroboration of Petitioner’s testimony. Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1044-45 (9th Cir.2009). She told Petitioner that he had to provide corroborative evidence and continued his case so that he would have an opportunity to obtain it. Petitioner, however, failed to produce such evidence, and the record does not compel the conclusion that the evidence was unavailable. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4) (“No court shall reverse a determination made by a trier of fact with respect to the availability of corroborating evidence ... unless the court finds ... that a reasonable trier of fact is compelled to conclude that such corroborating evidence is unavailable.”). Although the IJ could have found Petitioner credible even without corroboration, Aden, 589 F.3d at 1044, the record did not compel her to do so, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). Similarly, because the record does not compel a contrary conclusion, it was permissible for the IJ to find that Petitioner had not established eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.

Petition DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.