Karanpreet Singh v. Attorney General United States

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 21-2083 ___________ KARANPREET SINGH, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ____________________________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A215-537-131) Immigration Judge: Nicholas A. Martz ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) on March 28, 2022 Before: KRAUSE, BIBAS, and SCIRICA Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: April 4, 2022) ____________________________________ ___________ OPINION* ___________ PER CURIAM Karanpreet Singh, proceeding pro se, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his applications for relief from removal. We will deny the petition for review. Singh is a 20-year-old native and citizen of India. He entered the United States in 2018 at the age of 16. The Department of Homeland Security issued a notice to appear charging that he was subject to removal for being present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled. Through counsel, Singh conceded that he was removable and sought asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. Singh, whose religion is Sikh, lived in Punjab, India and supported the Shiromani Akali Dal Amritsar (“SADA”) Party.1 Singh testified that his father joined the party, which fights for Sikh rights, in 2016. Although Singh was too young to join, he attended and promoted party rallies and camps. In January 2018 and in April 2018, following threats to his father, four Congress Party members assaulted Singh. They approached him in a party vehicle, beat him with batons and hockey sticks, and threatened to kill him. Singh did not know the * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 1 To the extent the parties refer to the Shiromani Akali Dal (“SAD”) Party as the party that Singh supported, the administrative record reflects that he supported the SADA Party, a “splinter” group of the SAD Party. See A.R. at 285, 416, 436. 2 men, who demanded that he stop working for the SADA Party and join them. They also asked him to sell drugs. Singh lost consciousness during the second attack. He received medical treatment after both incidents. Singh did not return to school after the second attack. He left India in May 2018. Singh believed that Congress Party members could find him if he moved to another part of India. Singh testified that in September 2018, Congress Party members beat up his father and asked where he was. Singh’s family and others have told him that Congress Party members are still looking for him. The Congress Party is the ruling party in the state of Punjab, but it does not control the national government. The IJ denied Singh’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the CAT. The BIA affirmed the denial of relief on appeal. The BIA agreed with the IJ that, even if …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals