Kaur

MEMORANDUM **

Harvinder Kaur, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) opinion which adopted and affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Kaur is statutorily ineligible for asylum based on the one-year time bar. See Ramadan v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 1218, 1221-22 (9th Cir.2005). We dismiss the petitions with respect to the asylum claim.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over the remaining claims. “Where, as here, the BIA adopts the IJ’s decision while adding its own reasons, we review both decisions.” See Kataria v. INS, 232 F.3d 1107, 1112 (9th Cir.2000). We review for substantial evidence the decision to deny withholding of removal, Hakeem v. INS, 273 F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir.2001), and relief under CAT, Zheng v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1193 (9th Cir.2003). We deny these claims.

Even assuming Kaur testified credibly, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that the harm Kaur suffered during her police detention did not rise to…