Case Name: Harvinder SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-03-16
Citations: 125 F. App'x 141
Docket Number: No. 03-73223; Agency No. A78-257-271
Parties: Harvinder SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 125
Pages: 141–142

Head Matter:
Harvinder SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-73223.
Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 11, 2005.
Decided March 16, 2005.
Earle A. Sylva, George T. Heridis, Rai & Associates, PC, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Marshall Tamor Golding, David Y. Bernal, Attorney, Richard M. Evans, Russell J.E. Verby, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 43(c)(2).
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Petitioner Harvinder Singh applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and Con vention Against Torture protection. The immigration judge denied his application based on an adverse credibility finding, which the BIA affirmed. Singh now petitions for a rehearing.
The panel reviews the BIA's denial of asylum or withholding of removal for substantial evidence. Cordon-Garcia v. INS, 204 F.3d 985, 990 (9th Cir.2000). Singh's testimony contained material inconsistencies. We therefore find that the adverse credibility finding was supported by substantial evidence.
PETITION 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.