FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 4 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FNU NAJIBUL HAQ, AKA Najibul Haq No. 16-73067 Siddiqi, Agency No. A206-032-960 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 14, 2020** Pasadena, California Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and FERNANDEZ and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. * 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). Petitioner Najibul Haq Siddiqi,1 a native and citizen of Afghanistan, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum,2 withholding of removal,3 and Convention Against Torture (“CAT”)4 relief. We deny the petition. The BIA’s determination that an alien is “not eligible for asylum must be upheld if ‘supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record.’” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S. Ct. 812, 815, 117 L. Ed. 2d 38 (1992) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4) (1992)). “It can be reversed only if the evidence presented . . . was such that a reasonable factfinder would have to conclude that the requisite fear of persecution existed.” Id.; see also Lianhua Jiang v. Holder, 754 F.3d 733, 738 (9th Cir. 2014). The same standard applies to 1 Petitioner’s visa was issued, and his notice to appear was served, under the name FNU (First Name Unknown) Haq. However, he testified that his last name is Siddiqi and filed his asylum application under that name. We therefore refer to him as such. 2 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(1). 3 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A). 4 United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted Dec. 10, 1984, S. Treaty Doc. No. 100-20 (1988), 1465 U.N.T.S. 85, implemented at 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18. 2 adverse credibility determinations. See Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010). We have reviewed the record and are satisfied that the BIA’s determination was supported by substantial evidence. The IJ’s adverse credibility determination was based in part on Siddiqi’s demeanor during cross-examination, and the IJ identified particular instances of evasiveness supporting the adverse credibility determination. See id. at 1041–42. As to the inconsistencies in Siddiqi’s testimony regarding the Taliban’s persecution of him and his furtive crossing into Canada, Siddiqi has waived any challenges to those issues as proper grounds for the adverse credibility determination by not arguing them in his opening brief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996). Moreover, on this record, Siddiqi has failed to establish a clear probability of persecution, as required for his withholding of removal claim. See Garcia v. Holder, 749 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2014); see also ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals