Singh

MEMORANDUM ***

We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary denial of adjustment of status. See 309(c)(4)(E) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-208 ; Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir.1997). Singh has raised no substantial claim that he was denied due process of law. He does nothing more than second-guess the Board’s weighing of the evidence. The Board was entitled to conclude from his ex-lawyer’s declaration, as well as from the various inconsistencies found in Singh’s biographic information forms and testimony, that Singh had been less than truthful and therefore did not present a case warranting the favorable exercise of discretion.

Singh also appeals the Office of Administrative Appeals’ denial of his request for temporary protected status as a special agricultural worker (SAW) under section 210 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The OAA did not abuse its discretion, and its findings are not “directly contrary to clear and convincing facts contained in the record considered as a whole.” 8 U.S.G. § 1160(e)(3)(B). Singh offered weak and contradictory evidence that he really was an agricultural worker. His…