Singh

facts quite unlike those he asserted in his motion to reopen. We hold that such blanket reliance on a prior adverse credibility determination that was based on dissimilar facts contravenes the law of the Ninth Circuit. We therefore grant Singh’s petition for review and remand. 1 I. A. Singh, a native and citizen of India born in December 1989, arrived in the United States without documentation in May 2013. He applied for admission, and the United States Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) took his sworn statement (“CBP Interview”). Singh claimed he faced and feared persecution due to his association with the Simranjit Singh Mann party (“Mann Party”), a Sikh nationalist party. According to Singh, he “used to belong to” a rival Sikh-

1 We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.

SINGH V. GARLAND

centric party, the Shiromani Akali Dal Badal party (“Badal Party”), but later joined the Mann Party. For that, members of the Badal Party beat him and threatened to kill him. Singh swore that members of the Badal Party likewise beat his father, Kewal Singh, and “threaten[ed] to kill him.” Yet his father was not coming to the United States because the “village…