Naamany

MEMORANDUM **

Gabriela Naamany, a native and citizen of Romania, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision, adopting and affirming in part the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 .

*651 To the extent that the BIA adopts and affirms the IJ, we review the IJ’s decision as if it were the final agency action. Nuru v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1207, 1215 (9th Cir.2005) . We review for substantial evidence, Ge v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2004), and we grant the petition for review and remand.

The IJ found that Naamany was not credible because he found it implausible that the police were still looking for her two years after she left the country. Substantial evidence does not support this finding because it rests on “impermissible speculation” in that it was “based on the IJ’s personal conjecture about what [the Romanian] authorities would or would not do.” Ge, 367 F.3d at 1124-25 .

In addition, the IJ found that Naamany was not credible on the ground that she testified inconsistently as to…