NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 22 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MANI KARAN, No. 20-71812 Petitioner, Agency No. A205-586-456 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 18, 2021** San Francisco, California Before: PAEZ, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Mani Karan, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review from a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding the denial of his asylum claim.1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the * 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). 1 Karan failed to exhaust his claims for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture, so we do not consider them. petition. Karan alleges that he was beaten by his girlfriend’s family after seeking their permission to marry her. He testified that his girlfriend’s family did not want them to marry because their families had different castes, religions, and levels of wealth. He further testified that he left India because he was afraid that his girlfriend’s family would kill him. The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) found Karan to be not credible, and the BIA upheld the adverse credibility determination. Because the BIA’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, we deny the petition for review. See Garland v. Ming Dai, 141 S. Ct. 1669, 1677 (2021) (“When it comes to questions of fact . . . a reviewing court must accept ‘administrative findings’ as ‘conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.’” (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B))). 1. The BIA cited a discrepancy in Karan’s account of when his girlfriend’s family beat him. Karan testified that he was beaten by his girlfriend’s family on December 25, 2012. In a sworn statement given on April 4, 2013, however, he said that “[h]er family beat me up once about two months ago,” which would be in or about February 2013. Karan now asserts that there is no discrepancy between these two statements because he never “state[d] he was beaten first in February 2013.” To the extent that this argument implies that he was beaten multiple 2 times, it is contradicted by his statements on the record that he was beaten only a single time. Substantial evidence supports this basis for the adverse credibility determination. 2. The BIA cited a discrepancy between Karan’s credible fear interview, in which he stated that his girlfriend’s family would kill him because “[t]hey were a different race,” and his subsequent testimony that it was because she was Sikh and he was Hindu. In his briefing to this court, Karan argues for the first time that no discrepancy exists because the translator for his …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals