Joginder Singh v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 548 F. App'x 478 ( 2013 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 10 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOGINDER SINGH, No. 11-73757
Petitioner, Agency No. A076-858-121
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 19, 2013**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Joginder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d
1482, 1487 (9th Cir. 1997), and we deny the petition for review.
Singh testified that, during both of his arrests, police questioned him about
two recent crimes and Singh’s involvement in them. Substantial evidence supports
the agency’s finding that, even if credible, Singh failed to establish past
persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a protected
ground. See Dinu v. Ashcroft, 372 F.3d 1041, 1044-45 (9th Cir. 2004) (record
supported the agency’s finding that police were pursuing legitimate goal of finding
evidence of crime). Accordingly, Singh’s asylum and withholding of removal
claims fail. See id. at 1045.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Singh failed to establish it is more likely than not that he will be tortured if
returned to India. See Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100, 1113 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 11-73757