Arora

Arora v. Ashcroft

Good Law
95 F. App'x 893
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 21, 2004No. 02-74342; Agency No. A75-661-205California391 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Manav Arora, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of a final order of deportation by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). The BIA summarily affirmed the Immigration Judge (“IJ”), who denied Arora’s application for asylum and withholding of deportation. The IJ found that Arora was not credible and concluded that he had not carried his burden of establishing eligibility for asylum and deportation of withholding. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We affirm.

Arora bears the burden of establishing his eligibility for asylum. Ghaly v. INS, 58 F.3d 1425, 1428 (9th Cir.1995). We review credibility findings under the substantial evidence standard. Pal v. INS, 204 F.3d 935, 938 (9th Cir.2000). Because the BIA adopted the IJ’s decision and reasoning, we review the IJ’s ruling. Arulampalam v. Ashcroft, 353 F.3d 679, 680 (9th Cir. 2003). The IJ’s decision must be affirmed, unless a reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude that the credibility finding is not supported by substantial evidence. Valderrama v. INS, 260 F.3d 1083, 1085 (9th Cir.2001).

The IJ found that Arora’s testimony was not credible based on the…

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.