Case: 21-489, 04/17/2023, DktEntry: 34.1, Page 1 of 5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 17 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GERALD NKENGAFAC CHABAJA, No. 21-489 Agency No. Petitioner, A213-190-491 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 13, 2023** San Francisco, California Before: S.R. THOMAS and KOH, Circuit Judges, and RAKOFF, District Judge.*** Gerald Nkengafac Chabaja (“Chabaja”), a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying * 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). *** The Honorable Jed S. Rakoff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation. Case: 21-489, 04/17/2023, DktEntry: 34.1, Page 2 of 5 his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). As the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we do not recount them here. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, as well as adverse credibility determinations, for substantial evidence. Duran-Rodriguez v. Barr, 918 F.3d 1025, 1028 (9th Cir. 2019); Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010). We dismiss the petition in part, deny in part, and grant and remand in part for proceedings consistent with this disposition. 1. Limiting our review to the grounds relied upon by the BIA, Lai v. Holder, 773 F.3d 966, 970 (9th Cir. 2014), substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on Chabaja’s inconsistencies and demeanor, see Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1044 (explaining that in making an adverse credibility determination, the agency may consider an applicant’s inconsistency and demeanor). Substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility determination based on the inconsistency between Chabaja’s testimony and his border interview. Before the IJ, Chabaja testified that the military arrested him after discovering pictures of dead soldiers on his phone. However, in his border interview, Chabaja stated that the picture that caused his arrest was of “a flag that represented the English-speaking Cameroons.” This inconsistency was not trivial, as it related to the alleged persecution underlying his claim for relief. See id. at 1046–47 (“Although inconsistencies no longer 2 21-489 Case: 21-489, 04/17/2023, DktEntry: 34.1, Page 3 of 5 need to go to the heart of the petitioner’s claim, when an inconsistency is at the heart of the claim it doubtless is of great weight.”). Substantial evidence also supports the adverse credibility determination based on the inconsistency between Chabaja’s testimony and his supporting affidavits about whether he was attacked by separatists in Cameroon. Although Chabaja was afforded opportunities to explain …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals