Singh

MEMORANDUM **

Avtar Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Where, as here, the BIA affirms without an opinion, we review directly the IJ’s decision. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence, see Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1149-50 (9th Cir.1999), and we deny the petition for review.

The IJ concluded that Singh was not credible because he found that two of the affidavits he submitted appeared to be fraudulent. The IJ found that, even though the affidavits were purportedly from two different affiants, the two affidavits were nearly identical in content and phrasing, both omitted the same key events of Singh’s persecution, and both discussed a criminal charge that Singh had testified did not exist. As the IJ found, Singh did not offer an explanation for why *643 these affidavits are nearly identical, why they omit the same key events,…