Ran
Ran v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Narinder Veer Singh Ran and Ran Singh Bhagwan Singh petition for review from the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) affirmance of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their petition for asylum, mandatory withholding of removal, and withholding under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
*645 First, we are satisfied that the IJ properly pointed to testimonial inconsistencies which go to the heart of the claim and therefore support an adverse credibility determination. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003). Even assuming the petitioners testified credibly, however, the petitioners fail to show that they experienced persecution “on account of’ a protected ground, rather than street crime, private retaliation for whistleblowing, and arrests for good cause, none of which constitutes persecution. See Gormley v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.2004); Grava v. INS, 205 F.3d 1177 , 1181 n. 3 (9th Cir.2000). As for fear of future persecution, the petitioners similarly have not shown that any such persecution would be on account of a protected ground. See Al-Harbi v. INS, 242 F.3d 882, 888 (9th Cir.2001).