Prasad
Prasad v. Holder
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Lead petitioner Bijendra Prasad and his family, natives and citizens of Fiji, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), and the BIA’s order denying his motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 *548 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence adverse credibility findings, Si-dhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1088 (9th Cir.2000), and review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Guzman v. INS, 318 F.3d 911 , 912 n. 1 (9th Cir. 2003) (per curiam). We deny the petitions for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because Prasad demonstrated “vague to little” knowledge regarding the political party he supported, and erroneously testified the political party formed in 1987 when record evidence established it formed in 1963. See Singh v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1139, 1143 (9th Cir.2004). Because the IJ had reason to question Prasad’s credibility, the IJ reasonably took into account Prasad’s failure to provide…