Kumar
Kumar v. Holder
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Satish Kumar, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“LJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence adverse credibility findings, Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2004), and de novo claims of due process violations, Col menar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.2000). We deny the petition for review.
The government’s submission of a nearly identical declaration prepared by another asylum applicant provides substantial evidence to support the agency’s finding that Kumar submitted a false document. See Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741, 745 (9th Cir.2004). Because the genuineness of this document went to the heart of Ku-mar’s asylum claim, substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination. See id. In the absence of credible evidence, Kumar’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).