Kaur

MEMORANDUM **

Jaspreet Kaur (“Kaur”) petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ *79 (“BIA”) summary affirmation of the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We review the IJ’s decision and affirm.

Although minor inconsistencies that do not go to the heart of a petitioner’s claim cannot form the basis of an adverse credibility determination, see Manimbao v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 655, 660 (9th Cir.2003), it is appropriate for an IJ to consider lack of specificity of testimony when making this judgment. See Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1153 (9th Cir.1999). Viewing the record as a whole in light of these considerations, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Kaur’s testimony was not credible.

Specifically, Kaur did not address the lack of a plausible explanation for taking computer classes while allegedly in hiding, other than to say that such an inconsistency does not go to the heart of her claim. The fact that she was in hiding, however, goes directly to the heart of her claim that she feared persecution from the police were they to ascertain…