Parshutnam Sandhu v. Eric Holder, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Parshutnam Singh Sandhu petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision affirming an immigration judge’s denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Sandhu has not demonstrated past persecution on account of a protected ground, for two reasons. First, Sandhu fails to show that the record compels the conclusion that his arrest was not in relation to a criminal investigation. See Dinu v. Ashcroft, 372 F.3d 1041, 1044 (9th Cir.2004). Second, Sandhu fails to demonstrate that the record compels the conclusion that the Punjab police persecuted him based on imputed political opinion. The record does not even show that the Punjab police were aware of the political opinions of the terrorists whose opinions Sandhu seeks to have imputed to him.

Sandhu has also failed to demonstrate an objectively well-founded fear of future persecution…