Hakan Dincer v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Hakan Dincer petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we grant the petition.
The immigration judge’s (IJ) adverse credibility finding was not supported by substantial evidence. The IJ failed to adequately consider Dincer’s credibility in light of the totality of the circumstances, as the REAL ID Act required her to do. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (b)(1)(B)(hi). Though Dincer struggled to provide a few relevant dates during his asylum interview, he promptly self-corrected all but two trivial inconsistencies in dates, and provided overall consistent testimony throughout his asylum application, asylum interview, and removal hearing. Dincer’s two trivial inconsistencies in dates are insufficiently substantial to support an adverse credibility determination. See Ai Jun Zhi v. Holder, 751 F.Sd 1088, 1091-92 (9th Cir. 2014); Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1086-86 (9th Cir.2011).
The IJ also faulted Dincer for providing inconsistent reasons for his difficulty in remembering dates,…