Pattar

MEMORANDUM **

Sukhwinder Singh Pattar petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The IJ found Pattar not credible and identified a number of inconsistencies in Pattar’s evidence. In affirming the IJ’s decision, the BIA noted that some of Petitioner’s inconsistencies were not material, but found there were also inconsistencies regarding some of Petitioner’s core allegations. Substantial evidence does not support the BIA’s determination. We grant the petition and remand.

“We review adverse credibility determinations for substantial evidence and reverse only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.” Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100, 1106 (9th Cir.2006). An adverse credibility determination “must be supported by a specific, cogent reason.” de Leon-Barrios v. INS, 116 F.3d 391 , 393 (9th Cir.1997). Also, the reason or reasons for an adverse credibility determination must “go to the ‘heart of [the] asylum claim.’ ” Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2004) (quoting Singh v. Ashcroft,…