FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 7 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PIERRE DAVID BOSSA, No. 18-70202 Petitioner, Agency No. A209-391-310 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted June 4, 2019 Seattle, Washington Before: D.W. NELSON, RAWLINSON, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Pierre Bossa, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal of the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying Bossa’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a). We deny Bossa’s petition for review. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. We review the BIA’s credibility finding for substantial evidence. See Guo v. Sessions, 897 F.3d 1208, 1212 (9th Cir. 2018). Under the substantial evidence standard, the court treats the agency’s determination as “conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n.1 (1992). The court affords IJs particular deference in the area of adverse credibility determinations because the IJ is, “by virtue of his acquired skill, uniquely qualified to decide whether an alien’s testimony has about it the ring of truth.” Sarvia-Quintanilla v. INS, 767 F.2d 1387, 1395 (9th Cir. 1985). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility decision. The IJ identified multiple inconsistences between Bossa’s testimony at his hearing before the IJ, his prior sworn statement, and his statements in his initial interview. Particularly, in his initial interview with a border patrol agent, Bossa stated he did not fear returning to Haiti and that he would not be harmed if returned. At his hearing, Bossa claimed fear based on sexual orientation and described incidents he experienced in his native Haiti and in Brazil, where he lived for nearly two years before arriving in the United States. Further, Bossa discuss an important incident at a soccer game in his credible fear interview, but did not mention it in his written asylum application, and then included information about this incident in his 2 declaration with more detail than he provided in the credible fear interview. The IJ questioned Bossa about the inconsistencies, but he provided shifting explanations. Bossa explained that he gave false information to the border patrol agent because there were many other Haiti immigrants in the room and it was too public, but later stated it was because he had difficulty with the interpreter. The IJ pointed out that the sworn statement expressly notes the interview may be the only opportunity for an alien to explain his fear of returning and that he did not mention any concerns related to the interpreter at the time. Bossa first explained that no one read had read him the ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals