Gagandeep Singh v. Loretta E. Lynch

MEMORANDUM

Gagandeep Singh petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) determination that he was removable for having procured a visa through marriage fraud, see 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(l)(G)(ii), and that he was therefore ineligible for adjustment-of-status or voluntary departure. Reviewing the BIA’s and IJ’s findings of fact for substantial evidence, see Vitug v. Holder, 723 F.3d 1056, 1062 (9th Cir.2013), we deny the petition.

1. The BIA and IJ properly relied on objective evidence in the record to determine Singh and his putative spouse, Day-len Mikha Mills, did not “intend[ ] to establish a life together at the time they were married.” Nakamoto v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 874, 882 (9th Cir.2004). The couple had only brief encounters leading up to the marriage, Mills received $5,000 after the engagement, the couple lived together only a brief period of time after marriage and then lived separately, they never consummated the marriage and did not have joint health insurance or property. Mills also made a sworn statement to a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) adjudicator that the marriage was not real…