9th Cir.

Singh v. Blanche

June 11, 2026 ·25-491 ·Unpublished · By Raj Patel

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review challenging a Board of Immigration Appeals decision. The court held that substantial evidence supported the Immigration Judge's adverse credibility finding regarding the petitioner's asylum claim.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:08

Background

Gurpawan Singh Singh, a native and citizen of India, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture protection based on fear of political violence due to his affiliation with the Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar) Party. The Immigration Judge denied his applications, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the decision without opinion. Singh petitioned for review in the Ninth Circuit.

The court’s reasoning

The court reviewed the Immigration Judge’s decision as if it were the Board’s decision. It applied the substantial evidence standard to factual findings, including credibility determinations. The Immigration Judge found the petitioner not credible due to factual inconsistencies between testimony and affidavits, omissions in applications, nervous demeanor, unresponsiveness, and lack of specificity. The petitioner challenged only one finding, arguing undue weight was given to minor inconsistencies. The court held that reweighing evidence is impermissible unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion, which was not the case here.

What it means going forward

The denial of the petition affirms the removal order and the denial of relief based on the Immigration Judge’s credibility findings.