Singh
Singh v. Mukasey
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Tarsem Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“U”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We review for substantial evidence, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s denial of asylum because, even taking Singh’s testimony as true, he failed to establish that his abuse by the Indian police was motivated, even in part, on account of a protected ground. See Dinu v. Ashcroft, 372 F.3d 1041, 1044-15 (9th Cir. 2004). Because Singh’s fear of future persecution is based on his past encounters with the Indian police, he has failed to show a well-founded fear of persecution on account of a protected ground. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955 , 961-62 (9th Cir.1996) (en banc).
Because Singh did not establish asylum eligibility, it necessarily follows that he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales,…