Duraisinga

Duraisinga v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Good Law
3 F. App'x 589
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 1, 2001No. 98-70556, 99-70970; INS No. A72 537 613California1,123 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*590 MEMORANDUM *

Sundararajan Duraisinga applied for asylum on the ground that in India, his home country, he was persecuted by a Tamil group from Sri Lanka (the Eelam People Liberation and Revolution Force, or “EPLRF”), because he supported a rival Sri Lankan Tamil group. He petitions for review of the orders denying his application for asylum (98-70556) and his motion to reopen (99-70970). Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we will not repeat them here.

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). See Ratnam v. INS, 154 F.3d 990 , 993 n. 1 (9th Cir.1998). When, as here, the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) conducts a de novo review of the record, we review the BIA’s decision rather than the decision of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”). See Perez v. INS, 96 F.3d 390, 392 (9th Cir.1996).

I. Credibility Determination.

We must decide whether substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Duraisinga was not credible. See Shah v. INS, 220 F.3d 1062, 1067 (9th Cir.2000).

Id. (quotations, internal alterations and citations omitted).

The BIA stated that Duraisinga testified inconsistently about his kidnaping, stating at various times that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.