Lubana

Lubana v. Gonzales

Good Law
176 F. App'x 783
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 12, 2006No. 04-71466California358 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jagdeep Singh Lubana is a native and citizen of India. Lubana petitions for re *784 view of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision, which adopted and affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

We lack jurisdiction to review both the BIA’s determination that Lubana is statutorily ineligible for asylum based on the one-year time bar, and the BIA’s determination that Lubana did not establish changed circumstances to excuse the one-year time bar. See Ramadan v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 1218, 1221-22 (9th Cir.2005). Accordingly, we dismiss the asylum claim.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over the remaining claims. Where, as here, the BIA adopts and affirms the IJ’s decision, we review the decision of the IJ as if it were that of the BIA. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence an adverse credibility determination, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042-43 (9th Cir.2001), and we deny these claims.

The IJ offered at least one specific, cogent reason for his credibility…

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.