Singh
Singh v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Jaskirt Singh petitions for review of the BIA’s denial of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, and its decision denying his motion to reconsider. We deny the petition.
The adverse credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence, notably the discrepancies among Singh’s written asylum application, his reported statements at the asylum officer interview, and his testimony at the hearing. Singh alleges that inconsistencies with statements at the asylum interview cannot provide substantial evidence, citing Singh v. Gonzales, 403 F.3d 1081, 1087 (9th Cir.2005). We disagree and conclude that this case is plainly distinguishable. The asylum officer testified at the hearing in this case. The record included ten pages of detailed, comprehensive, and coherent notes taken by the asylum officer during the interview. During both the interview and hearing, Singh was questioned about perceived inconsistencies. Many of the material inconsistencies “relate[d] to the basis for” the alleged fear of persecution and “went to the heart of [the] asylum claim.” Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001) (internal citations omitted); see…