Fan Zhang v. Loretta E. Lynch , 671 F. App'x 639 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION                          FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        DEC 20 2016
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    FAN ZHANG,                                        No.   14-73540
    Petitioner,                     Agency No. A088-484-465
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted December 14, 2016**
    Before:       WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
    Fan Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
    judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
    protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
    findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations
    created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 
    590 F.3d 1034
    , 1039-40 (9th Cir.
    2010), and we deny the petition for review.
    Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
    based on inconsistencies as to Zhang’s baptism date, his church membership in the
    U.S., and his reasons for not providing a bail receipt. See 
    id. at 1048
     (adverse
    credibility determination supported under the totality of circumstances). Zhang’s
    explanations to the agency do not compel a contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 
    204 F.3d 1241
    , 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible testimony, in this case,
    Zhang’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft,
    
    348 F.3d 1153
    , 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
    Zhang’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same testimony the
    agency found not credible, and the record does not otherwise compel the
    conclusion that it is more likely than not Zhang would be tortured if returned to
    China. See Shrestha, 
    590 F.3d at 1048-49
    .
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                   14-73540
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-73540

Citation Numbers: 671 F. App'x 639

Filed Date: 12/20/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023