Singh
Singh v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Parminder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and with *909 holding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, see Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 992-93 (9th Cir.2003), and deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because: Singh’s testimony was inconsistent; his demeanor seemed evasive; and he did not have personal identification or supporting documentation for his claim. See Wang v. INS, 352 F.3d 1250, 1256-57 (9th Cir.2003) (examining demeanor and inconsistencies, and finding substantial evidence to support an adverse credibility finding) (citations omitted); Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001) (holding that significant discrepancies that went to the heart of petitioner’s asylum claim supported an adverse credibility determination); Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1092 (9th Cir.2000) (concluding that there is no error by the IJ requesting documentation where petitioner’s credibility is…