BALJINDER KAUR; HARNEK SINGH V. ERIC H. HOLDER JR., No. 08-73781 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 26 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BALJINDER KAUR, Petitioner, No. 08-73781 Agency No. A077-833-433 v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. HARNEK SINGH, No. 09-70600 Petitioner, Agency No. A073-425-332 v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted December 4, 2013 San Francisco, California * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. Before: TROTT, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. In this consolidated appeal, husband and wife Harnek Singh (Singh) and Baljinder Kaur (Kaur) each petition for review of a final order of removal of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. With regard to Singh s petition, the Government has acknowledged that the BIA failed to consider Singh s challenge to the immigration judge s (IJ) finding of adverse credibility. In light of this concession, we grant Singh s petition in part and remand to the BIA for full consideration of Singh s challenge to the adversecredibility finding and of his eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal. We do not reach the merits of Singh s claim for relief under the Convention Against Torture. With regard to Kaur s petition, the Government has conceded that the finding of adverse credibility is not supported by the record. Accordingly, we grant Kaur s petition and remand to the BIA for plenary consideration of Kaur s claims, including her due process claim, accepting Kaur s testimony as credible. Singh s petition for review is GRANTED IN PART; REMANDED. Kaur s petition for review is GRANTED; REMANDED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.