Simarjit Singh v. Sally Q. Yates
677 F. App'x 985
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Singh, an Indian Sikh who entered the U.S. without inspection in 2010, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection based on political activity with the Akali Dal and alleged attacks by Congress Party members.
- Singh’s initial and amended asylum applications contained material inconsistencies about the nature, timing, and severity of the attacks, his membership in Akali Dal, and his travel route to the U.S.; some documents (doctor’s note, local official affidavit) were contradictory or raised questions.
- The IJ found Singh not credible, determined his asylum application was deliberately frivolous, denied asylum/withholding/CAT relief, and ordered removal.
- The BIA affirmed the adverse-credibility finding and the denials of asylum, withholding, and CAT relief, but reversed the IJ’s frivolousness finding.
- While appeals were pending, Singh married a U.S. citizen and obtained an approved family‑based visa petition; he moved the BIA to reopen and administratively close proceedings to allow him to seek a provisional unlawful‑presence waiver.
- The BIA denied reopening, noting the visa petition was not yet granted and that Singh had not shown his marriage was clearly bona fide; intervening regulatory amendments also provided an alternative path for waiver eligibility without reopening.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adverse‑credibility and entitlement to asylum/withholding/CAT | Singh argued inconsistencies were minor or due to translation/counseling and that he established persecution and membership in Akali Dal | Government argued inconsistencies and contradictory documentary evidence undermine credibility and negate required corroboration | Court upheld IJ/BIA: substantial evidence supports adverse‑credibility; denial of asylum, withholding, and CAT affirmed |
| Motion to reopen for administrative closure to pursue provisional waiver | Singh sought reopening/administrative closure to remove regulatory bar to provisional unlawful‑presence waiver after spouse’s visa petition approval | DHS argued marriage not shown bona fide and Singh undeserving due to lack of credibility; Government also notes regulatory change provides alternate route | Court held BIA did not abuse discretion in denying reopening; intervening regulation further moots necessity of reopening |
Key Cases Cited
- El‑Moussa v. Holder, 569 F.3d 250 (6th Cir. 2009) (adverse‑credibility may rest on inconsistencies that do not go to the heart of the claim)
- Mohammed v. Keisler, 507 F.3d 369 (6th Cir. 2007) (clear‑probability standard for withholding greater than asylum standard)
- Slyusar v. Holder, 740 F.3d 1068 (6th Cir. 2014) (adverse‑credibility fatal to asylum is also fatal to withholding and CAT claims)
- Gaye v. Lynch, 788 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 2015) (burden to corroborate when testimony is not believable, consistent, and detailed)
- Allabani v. Gonzales, 402 F.3d 668 (6th Cir. 2005) (standard for abuse of discretion in denial of motions to reopen)