Preet Kaur v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “[i]t strains credulity to hold that the evidence presented at the asy- lum hearing compels us to find Kaur believable for the sole reason that she admitted to being a liar.”
• noting that placing weight on inconsistencies not going to the heart of an asylum claim is especially problematic where there may be translation problems
• noting that placing weight on inconsistencies not going to the heart of an asylum claim is especially problematic where there may be translation problems
• holding 18 that minor inconsistencies that go to the heart of an applicant’s claim support an adverse 19 credibility finding
• holding inconsistencies must be evaluated “in light of all the circumstances of the case.”
• affirming an adverse credibility determination because the “repeated and significant inconsistencies” deprived petitioner’s claim of the “requisite ‘ring of truth’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).