Kaur
Kaur v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Petitioner Sukhvinder Kaur appeals the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order of removal to India. The BIA summarily affirmed the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision to deny Kaur’s application for asylum and withholding of removal. The IJ found that Kaur was not credible and did not establish that she has a well-founded fear of future persecution.
The adverse credibility finding is not supported by substantial evidence. The main basis for the adverse credibility finding was Kaur’s failure to state on her I-589 that she was raped, instead saying only that she was “insulted.” However, our cases have unequivocally held that failure to report a rape immediately is not a proper basis for an adverse credibility finding. Kebede v. Ashcroft, 366 F.3d 808, 811 (9th Cir.2004); Paramasamy v. Ash *653 croft, 295 F.3d 1047, 1052-53 (9th Cir.2002).
Furthermore, written on the 1-589 next to the word “insulted” is the phrase “further details to be provided,” which supports Kaur’s assertion that she was embarrassed to describe details on the form. Kaur also explained that in Punjabi the word “insulted” can mean “molested.”