FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8625416
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Singh v. Gonzales

No. 8625416 · Decided October 24, 2006
No. 8625416 · Ninth Circuit · 2006 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
October 24, 2006
Citation
No. 8625416
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Sukhchain Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal, and the BIA’s denial of his motion to remand for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Substantial evidence supports the Id’s and BIA’s adverse credibility finding based on an inconsistency between petitioner’s application and testimony regarding his first arrest, an implausibility regarding his fear of persecution, and his failure to provide easily available corroborating evidence. See Chebehoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043-45 ; see also Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1092 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that if the IJ has a reason to question the alien’s credibility, and the alien fails to produce easily available corroborating evidence, then the adverse credibility finding will withstand appellate review). Because petitioner failed to demonstrate that he was eligible for asylum, it follows that he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Fatah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003). Petitioner also failed to show that the BIA abused its discretion by denying his motion to remand to pursue CAT relief. See Movsisian v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1095, 1098 (9th Cir.2005). Because petitioner failed to establish prima facie eligibility for CAT relief, or provide any evidence that he would be at risk of suffering torture if returned to India, the BIA’s denial of the motion was not an abuse of discretion. See Ordonez v. INS, 345 F.3d 777, 785 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that prima facie eligibility is demonstrated by a showing that there is a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied). *810 The voluntary departure period is stayed pursuant to Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741, 750 (9th Cir.2004). 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 ** Sukhchain Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal, and
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Sukhchain Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal, and
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Singh v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on October 24, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8625416 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 →