Shrestha v. Holder

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that ignoring “relevant record evidence would be to make a credibility determination on less than the total circumstances in contravention of the REAL ID Act’s text.”
• holding that IJ should consider petitioner’s explanation for a perceived inconsistency to “shed[ ] light on whether there is in fact an inconsistency at all”
• holding that an adverse credibility determination under the REAL ID Act must take into account “the totality of the circumstances, and all relevant factors”
• holding that “when an inconsistency is at the heart of the claim it doubtless is of great weight”
• recognizing that “the normal limits of human understanding” may make some inconsistencies present in any case
• holding that an immigration judge “should consider . . . the petitioner’s explanation for a perceived inconsistency”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).