Singh

MEMORANDUM **

Narinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (the “Convention”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 992 (9th Cir.2003), and deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination based on the inconsistencies in Singh’s testimony regarding key elements of his asylum claim, including the events leading up to his departure and the persecution he claims to have suffered. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003) (upholding adverse credibility finding where inconsistencies went to key elements of the asylum application, including identity and membership in a persecuted group). Singh’s contention that the IJ improperly faulted him for not providing corroborating evidence does not compel a contrary result, because even had Singh’s evidence been admitted, it would not have resolved the…