Case ID: f-appx_98/html/0678-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Varinder KAUR; Deepika Kaur, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 03-70460.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 10, 2004.
    
    Decided May 20, 2004.
    Daniel B. Dorfman, Canoga Park, CA, for Petitioners.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Alison Marie Igoe, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Varinder Kaur and her daughter Deepika Kaur, natives and citizens of India, petition for review the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming their appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 338 (9th Cir.1995), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Petitioners did not meet their burden of proof because they did not submit credible evidence indicating they were persecuted in the India on account of their imputed political opinion. See id. at 339-40.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.