Dham
Dham v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
Rajiv Kumar Dham, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of deportation. Because the *94 transitional rules apply, Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997), this Court has jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). We review claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings de novo, Lopez-Urenda v. Ashcroft, 345 F.3d 788, 791 (9th Cir.2003), and review adverse credibility determinations for substantial evidence, Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1149 (9th Cir.1999). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because Petitioner’s testimony on cross-examination was inconsistent with his previous testimony on direct examination. Because the factual discrepancies regarding the details of his alleged arrests and his leadership position in the Bharatia Janata Party went to the heart of his claim, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s denial of asylum. See Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir.1991). Because Petitioner failed to…