Case: 20-60720 Document: 00516130102 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/14/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 14, 2021 No. 20-60720 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Kelley Mbi Anchieweh Alvine, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A213 327 529 Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Kelley Mbi Anchieweh Alvine, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Through * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-60720 Document: 00516130102 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/14/2021 No. 20-60720 counsel, she asserts that the IJ “cherry pick[ed] minor inconsistencies” to reach an adverse credibility finding. Her argument lacks merit as the factfinder may rely on any inconsistencies in making a credibility determination “as long as the totality of the circumstances establishes that an asylum applicant is not credible.” See Avelar-Oliva v. Barr, 954 F.3d 757, 763-64 (5th Cir. 2020) (quoting Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 538 (5th Cir. 2009)); 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii). The BIA supported its determination with specific reasons based on the record, including: (1) her nonresponsive answers to certain questions and her poor demeanor; (2) inconsistencies concerning the treatment she received at the hospital; and (3) inconsistencies concerning her work history. Anchieweh Alvine has not explained the inconsistencies or shown that based on the “totality of the circumstances, it is plain that no reasonable fact-finder could make such an adverse credibility ruling.” See Avelar-Oliva, 954 F.3d at 767 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Therefore, the BIA’s adverse credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence. See id.; Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d at 538- 39. The adverse credibility determination is fatal to her claims as the factual basis for her claims was the same and the denial of relief turned on the assessment of her credibility. See Suate-Orellana v. Barr, 979 F.3d 1056, 1061 (5th Cir. 2020); Chun v. INS, 40 F.3d 76, 78-79 (5th Cir. 1994). Next, Anchieweh Alvine argues that the BIA erred by determining that she was not eligible for asylum as a member of the particular social group of indigenous people of Southern Cameroon where the IJ did not make an adverse credibility finding or an explicit finding as to this claim. The BIA specifically determined that she waived this issue by not presenting it to the IJ and that this issue was moot because it affirmed the adverse credibility determination. Because this claim was not presented to the IJ and the BIA declined to review the claim, Anchieweh Alvine failed to exhaust it, and, thus, we lack …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals