Singh
Singh v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Baljeet Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We grant the petition for review. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural background of this case, we will not recount it here.
In this case, although both the BIA and the IJ commented extensively on Singh’s credibility, neither made an explicit adverse credibility finding. Merely commenting on credibility “does not constitute a credibility finding sufficient for review under the standards we have developed.” Mendoza Manimbao v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 852 (9th Cir.2002) as amended 329 F.3d 655, 660 (9th Cir.2003). Where the BIA does not make an explicit adverse credibility finding, we “are required to accept the petitioner’s testimony as true.” Hartooni v. INS, 21 F.3d 336, 343 (9th Cir.1994). The BIA also faulted Singh for not providing corroborating evidence. However, “[i]t is well established in this circuit that the BIA may not require independent corroborative evidence from an asylum applicant who testifies…