AVTAR SINGH V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 10-72358 (9th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 14 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AVTAR SINGH, No. 10-72358 Petitioner, Agency No. A076-860-078 v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted April 8, 2014 San Francisco, California Before: NOONAN, NGUYEN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. 1. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) did not abuse its discretion in affirming the Immigration Judge s discretionary denial of asylum. Substantial evidence supports the conclusion that Avtar Singh had engaged in marriage fraud. Immigration fraud is a proper consideration in a discretionary denial of asylum. Hosseini v. Gonzales, 471 F.3d 953, 957 (9th Cir. 2006). The BIA properly * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. Page 2 of 2 weighed this adverse factor alongside all other relevant considerations, including favorable factors such as family reunification. See Kalubi v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1134, 1139 (9th Cir. 2004). The denial is thus neither manifestly contrary to the law [nor] an abuse of discretion. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(D). 2. Singh s Convention Against Torture (CAT) claim is moot. The BIA granted Singh withholding of removal, the broadest relief that would be available to him under CAT. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(4). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

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.