Singh

MEMORANDUM **

Harinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“U”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under *259 the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Reviewing the IJ’s adverse credibility determination for substantial evidence, see Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244-45 (9th Cir.2000), we vacate the BIA’s order and remand for further proceedings concerning Singh’s claims.

Several of the IJ’s reasons for the adverse credibility determination are not “valid grounds upon which to base a finding that the applicant is not credible.” Mendoza Manimbao v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 655, 658 (9th Cir.2003) (quotation marks and citation omitted). First, the IJ doubted Singh’s account of the circumstances leading to his two claimed arrests. In making these findings, the IJ engaged in impermissible speculation as to how militants would act, see Lopez-Reyes v. INS, 79 F.3d 908, 912 (9th Cir.1996), and misapprehended Singh’s testimony by disregarding part of his account of the second arrest, namely, that the police’s motive was to determine whether…

concurring.

I separately concur to state that, in my view, this court’s remand does not eliminate the opportunity for the IJ to conclude that the timing of the marriage here (ie., Singh married Jenkins almost 6 months after deportation proceedings commenced), may provide substantial evidence for the IJ to make an adverse credibility determination with respect to Singh’s asylum petition. The IJ could infer from the timing of the marriage that Singh entered into the fraudulent marriage because he had doubts as to the merits of his case, and did not expect his asylum claim to succeed, and not because he was fleeing persecution. Cf Section 5 of the Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1154 (h) & 1255(e) (presumption that an alien who marries an American citizen during deportation or exclusion proceedings entered into a fraudulent marriage and requiring such alien to reside outside the United States for two years before the INS may consider adjustment in the alien’s immigration status).