Singh
Singh v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Petitioner Perget Singh (“Perget”) challenges the denial of asylum relief based on an adverse credibility finding by the Immigration Judge (“IJ”). The IJ’s adverse credibility finding was based on (1) Per-get’s marital situation, (2) his demeanor, (3) inconsistencies and vagueness in his testimony, and (4) inconsistencies in his supporting documentation. The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) held the IJ erred in basing the credibility finding on Perget’s marital situation and his demean- or, but affirmed the adverse credibility finding and adopted the IJ’s findings regarding Perget’s testimonial inconsistencies and vagueness as well as the inconsistencies in his documentation.
In order to support an adverse credibility finding, the IJ must identify inconsistencies that go to the heart of the claim. Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2004). Here, the minor inconsistencies identified by the IJ between Per-get’s testimony and that of other witnesses and the minor inconsistencies within Per-get’s own testimony did not go to the heart of Perget’s claim.
Vagueness or the inability to articulate pertinent details regarding a claim can provide the basis for an…