Prasad

*47 MEMORANDUM **

Ramesh Prasad and his wife, Fouzia Guiñar Prasad, natives and citizens of Fiji, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review an adverse credibility finding for substantial evidence and will uphold the decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Singh v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1139, 1143 (9th Cir.2004). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination because Prasad’s testimony lacked specificity regarding his abuse and detentions, particularly in light of the graphic description he provided in his supporting declaration. See Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1153 (9th Cir.1999) (the level of specificity in an applicant’s testimony is an appropriate consideration in an adverse credibility determination). For example, Prasad indicated in his declaration that government authorities poked needles under his fingernails, hung him…