Singh
Singh v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Gurdeep Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge’s (IJ) order of removal and the IJ’s denial of Singh’s application for adjustment of status.
Singh first argues that the IJ erred in finding that he had failed to satisfy his burden of proving eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal based on an adverse credibility finding. 1 We have jurisdiction to review the order of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a). We review the adverse credibility finding under the substantial evidence standard and will uphold the decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Singh v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1139, 1143 (9th Cir.2004).
Substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility determination. The IJ found that Singh’s testimony regarding material events was, in several instances, inconsistent, contradictory, incredible, and incomplete. See Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1152-53 (9th Cir.1999). Therefore, the BIA did not err in denying Singh’s application for asylum and withholding of removal.