Opinion ID: 1354526
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: Where the BIA summarily adopts the IJ's decision without issuing its own opinion, we review the decision of the IJ as the final administrative order. Hasan v. Ashcroft, 397 F.3d 417, 419 (6th Cir.2005). [T]he factual findings of the IJ are reviewed under the substantial-evidence standard, and we will not reverse those findings `unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.' Singh v. Gonzales, 451 F.3d 400, 403 (6th Cir.2006) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B)). But [a] determination based on flawed reasoning . . . will not satisfy the substantial evidence standard, and the agency's use of an inappropriately stringent standard when evaluating an applicant's testimony constitutes legal, not factual error. Balachova v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 374, 380 (2d Cir.2008) (internal quotations and citations omitted). [W]e generally review questions of law de novo, but `defer to the [IJ]'s reasonable interpretations of the INA.' Singh, 451 F.3d at 403 (quoting Patel v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 685, 692 (6th Cir.2005)).