Manraj Singh Sidhu v. Immigration and Naturalizationservice

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an IJ can, in certain circumstances, demand corroborating evidence when that evidence is “non-duplicative, material, [and] easily available”
• holding that an adverse inference was permissible when the Petitioner failed to produce corroborating evidence
• holding that it is inappropriate to base adverse credibility finding on a petitioner’s inability to obtain corroborating evidence from individuals living outside the United States
• stating that affidavits from those outside the United States are “almost never easily available” (emphasis added)
• noting that an affidavit from someone living outside the United States is “almost never easily available”
• holding that, where an applicant had no notice that an adverse credibility determination could be based on his failure to call a witness to corroborate his testimony, due process required a remand for a new hearing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).