NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 17 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOSE ROBERTO ALDANA SOSA, No. 16-73875 Petitioner, Agency No. A205-476-548 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 15, 2022** San Francisco, California Before: S.R. THOMAS, GOULD, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Petitioner Jose Aldana Sosa seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for withholding of removal, asylum, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We write for the parties and assume * 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). their familiarity with the facts. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for review. 1. Petitioner argues that the IJ failed to make an explicit adverse credibility finding, and that therefore, the BIA should have remanded to the IJ with instructions to make an express credibility determination. However, this assertion is plainly contradicted by the IJ’s written decision. Under Section III.D, entitled “Credibility,” the IJ found as follows: “The Court finds that the respondent’s testimony was not consistent with the affidavit in his I-589 asylum application. . . . The Court finds that the respondent lacks credibility.” (emphasis in original). An adverse credibility finding “does not require the recitation of a particular formula.” Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010). Here, it is clear the IJ made an explicit adverse credibility determination. 2. “Because the BIA adopted the IJ’s decisions, we review not only the decision of the BIA, but those of the IJ as well.” B.R. v. Garland, 26 F.4th 827, 835 n.4 (9th Cir. 2022) (citing Matter of Burbano, 20 I. & N. Dec. 872, 876 (BIA 1994)). The IJ’s adverse credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence. In his I-589 application, Petitioner stated that he had been in a motorcycle accident in which the brother of a bodyguard for local drug traffickers was killed, resulting in the bodyguard making threats against Petitioner’s life. However, Petitioner’s submitted evidence contains only a single police report concerning an automobile 2 accident, one in which the affected motorcyclist lived, having suffered only a broken bone. When asked why he failed to submit a police report of the allegedly fatal motorcycle accident, Petitioner gave no answer, stating that “[i]t was my mistake to not clear that up, but if you give me another opportunity, I will.” Yet on appeal, Petitioner failed to produce this police report to the BIA. Additionally, when asked by the IJ why Petitioner presently feared harm in Guatemala, he referred to the incident of his father being killed by cattle thieves, although he acknowledged …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals