FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8622188
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Singh v. Gonzales

No. 8622188 · Decided June 19, 2006
No. 8622188 · Ninth Circuit · 2006 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 19, 2006
Citation
No. 8622188
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Amrik Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and deny the petition for review. Reviewing for substantial evidence, see Singh v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1139, 1143 (9th Cir.2004), we conclude the record supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. Among other discrepancies, Singh testified that he was an active member in the political party led by Simranjit Singh Mann but was unable to provide the official name of the party. Moreover, Singh affirmatively testified that his party’s candidate, Varinder Singh, won the February 2002 election and was the “President of Punjab.” However, uncontradicted record evidence shows Varinder Singh placed fifth in that election, garnering only 3.99% of the vote. Because Singh claimed that police persecuted him on account of his membership in Mann’s party, these inconsistencies go to the heart of Singh’s claim and, thus, properly support the IJ’s adverse credibility finding. See id. at 1141-43 (upholding IJ’s adverse credibility finding based, in part, on petitioner’s lack of knowledge about the political organization in which his claimed membership was the alleged basis for his persecution). Because Singh failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to meet the more rigorous standard for withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003). Finally, as Singh’s claim for relief under CAT relies on the same evidence the IJ deemed not credible in the asylum context and he points to no additional evidence the IJ should have considered regarding the likelihood of torture if removed to India, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at 1157 . PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Amrik Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his applications for asylum, withholdi
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Amrik Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his applications for asylum, withholdi
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Singh v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 19, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8622188 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →