Shunxing Song v. Eric H. Holder Jr. , 439 F. App'x 638 ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 23 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHUNXING SONG, No. 09-70108
Petitioner, Agency No. A088-104-633
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Shunxing Song, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal,
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 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 (9th Cir.
2010), and review de novo claims of due process violations, Colmenar v. INS, 210
F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny the petition for review.
The IJ found Song not credible for several reasons, including an
inconsistency between Song’s testimony and his documentary evidence regarding
his employment history in China, as well as his failure adequately to explain this
inconsistency. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility
determination. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1040-44 (adverse credibility
determination was reasonable under the REAL ID Act’s “totality of the
circumstances”). In the absence of credible testimony, Song’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
Because Song’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony found to be not
credible, and he points to no other evidence the IJ should have considered,
substantial evidence also supports the denial of CAT relief. See id. at 1156-57.
2 09-70108
Finally, the record does not support Song’s contention that the IJ was biased.
See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and
prejudice to prevail in due process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 09-70108