BALJIT SINGH V. ERIC H. HOLDER JR., No. 08-73375 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED APR 18 2013 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BALJIT SINGH, No. 08-73375 Petitioner, Agency No. A098-847-983 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 15, 2013 ** San Francisco, California Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges. Baljit Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture relief. The BIA affirmed the Immigration Judge ( IJ ), who found that Singh was not credible. Singh had failed to provide * 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). corroborating evidence, that he should reasonably have been able to obtain, of a complaint allegedly made to the Punjab State Human Rights Commission in India. Under the REAL ID Act, an IJ can require a noncitizen to provide evidence to corroborate testimony unless the noncitizen does not have the evidence and cannot reasonably obtain it. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii). We may not reverse an IJ s determination that corroborating evidence is reasonably available unless the record compels a finding to the contrary. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4). Singh contends he could not get a copy of his Human Rights Commission complaint because he did not have the complaint number. The record shows, however, that the Commission s website had a search page, where this information could be obtained. Neither Singh nor his counsel used this tool despite the IJ s repeated suggestions to do so. The record therefore supports the IJ s finding that if Singh had filed a complaint, he could reasonably have obtained corroborating evidence of it, but failed to do so. The petition for review is DENIED. 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.
