Singh

MEMORANDUM ***

Gurgit Singh (“Singh”) petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying him asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a), and we deny the petition.

Singh challenges the IJ’s determination that he was not credible. 2 We review adverse credibility determinations for “substantial evidence.” Garrovillas v. INS, 156 F.3d 1010, 1013 (9th Cir.1998). We may “reverse such findings only where the evidence presented by the applicant would compel any reasonable factfinder to reach a contrary result.” Ladha v. INS, 215 F.3d 889, 896 (9th Cir.2000) (citing INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992)). In making an adverse credibility determination, the IJ must “have a legitimate articulable basis to question the petitioner’s credibility, and must offer a specific, cogent reason for any stated disbelief.” Singh v. Ashcroft, 301 F.3d 1109, 1111 (9th Cir.2002) (citations omitted).

Here, the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was supported by specific, cogent…