Samsudeen

Samsudeen v. Gonzales

Good Law
219 F. App'x 623
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 12, 2006No. 05-71426California251 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mohideen Samsudeen, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision summarily affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal, and request for relief under the Convention *624 Against Torture (“CAT”). We review for substantial evidence and will uphold the IJ’s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 992-93 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s denial of asylum based on an adverse credibility finding, because Samsudeen’s testimony was inconsistent with documentation he submitted regarding his fear of returning to India. See Pal v. INS, 204 F.3d 935, 938 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that documents submitted by petitioner which contradict petitioner’s testimony may form the basis for an adverse credibility finding).

Because Samsudeen failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

Because Samsudeen’s claim under the CAT is based on the same…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.