Rampal

MEMORANDUM ***

Chander Rampal, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of *409 Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision, which summarily affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We deny the petition for review.

Where, as here, the BIA affirms without an opinion, we review the IJ’s decision directly. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence an adverse credibility determination. Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001).

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s reliance upon a critical omission in Ram-pal’s asylum application. See Alvarez-Santos v. INS, 332 F.3d 1245, 1254 (9th Cir.2003). The omission of the 1992 arrest by the Sikh militants goes directly to the heart of Rampal’s claim because the number of arrests by the Sikh militants, when they occurred, as well as the location of the arrests formed the basis of Rampal’s alleged persecution and fear of future persecution. See id. Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s…