Kumar
Kumar v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Parmodh Kumar, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals. The Board dismissed Kumar’s appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (“U”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We deny the petition.
The Board conducted a de novo review of the IJ’s oral decision. Our review is therefore limited to the Board’s decision, “except to the extent that the IJ’s opinion is expressly adopted.” Shah v. INS, 220 F.3d 1062, 1067 (9th Cir.2000) (internal quotation marks omitted). We review whether the Board’s conclusions are supported by substantial evidence. Id. We will grant the petition only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir.2006).
The Board found that, even if Kumar demonstrated past persecution, the government met its burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that internal relocation would be safe and reasonable under all the circumstances. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s conclusion. See Kaiser v. Ashcroft, 390…