Paramanantham

MEMORANDUM ***

Ramesh Paramanantham, a native and citizen of Sri Lanka, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

The IJ found that Paramanantham was not a credible witness. “We review adverse credibility determinations for substantial evidence and reverse only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.” Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100, 1105 (9th Cir.2006). The IJ must articulate “specific, cogent reasons” for the finding. Id. For applications filed before May 11, 2005, we require that these underlying reasons “strike at the heart of the claim” for asylum. Id. However, the REAL ID Act of 2005 (“the REAL ID Act”) eliminated this requirement for all applications filed after that date. 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (b)(l)(B)(iii). Because Paramanantham’s application was filed after May 11, 2005, the REAL ID Act applies in this case.

The BIA gave specific, cogent reasons for its adverse credibility determination. In particular, it pointed to crucial inconsistencies between Paramanantham’s testimony and an…