Namasivayam

Namasivayam v. Gonzales

Good Law
168 F. App'x 185
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 17, 2006No. 03-74420California276 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Surendrarama Namasivayam, a native and citizen of Malaysia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, and may reverse only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition for review.

The IJ denied relief on the ground that Namasivayam was not credible. The record does not compel a contrary conclusion because Namasivayam presented vague testimony that contained inconsistencies that went to the heart of his claim. See id; Wang v. INS, 352 F.3d 1250, 1259 (9th Cir.2003) (so long as one of the identified grounds is supported by substantial evidence and goes to the heart of the claim of persecution, the Court is bound to accept the IJ’s adverse credibility finding).

In the absence of credible testimony, Namasivayam failed to demonstrate eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.