Tarigue
Tarigue v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
Mahammad M. Tarigue, his wife, and son appeal the dismissal of his application for asylum or withholding of deportation under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a) (1994). The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) adopted the adverse credibility finding of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”). The IJ based her credibility determination on the fact that Tarigue 1 omitted details of religious persecution by Islamic fundamentalists from his initial asylum application. He relied instead on his political difficulties with the then-dominant Bangladesh National Party. We affirm the BIA and deny the petition for review.
Tarigue’s initial application omitted incidents that included being beaten at the mosque, his house being bombed, and being declared an apostate. While “minor inconsistencies and inconsistencies that do not go to the heart of the asylum claim cannot support adverse credibility determinations,” these omissions were not minor. Chand v. I.N.S., 222 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir.2000). They essentially changed his application from one for asylum for political persecution to asylum for religious persecution. At least one incident omitted from his initial application — the bombing of his home…