Singh
Singh v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Kuldip Singh, a native citizen of India from Punjab, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (“BIA”) order affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying Singh’s application for asylum and withholding from removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b) and deny the petition.
Singh’s attorney below failed to preserve any issues not raised in Singh’s notice of appeal to the BIA by not timely submitting a brief in the BIA proceedings. See Cortez-Acosta v. INS, 234 F.3d 476, 480 (9th Cir.2000). Singh’s “Opening Brief’ also lacks any cogent legal argument to clarify the precise issues that remain. We determine that Singh has preserved the issues of whether the IJ erred in denying Singh’s application for asylum and withholding from removal because Singh was not credible and, in the alternative, due to changed country conditions. Findings of adverse credibility and changed country conditions supporting the denial of asylum and withholding from removal will be upheld if substantial evidence in the record supports the IJ’s decision. Gui v. INS, 280 F.3d 1217, 1225, 1228 (9th Cir.2002).