NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 15 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RAKIBUL HASSAN; et al., No. 18-72925 Petitioners, Agency Nos. A089-874-718 A089-874-719 v. A089-874-720 A089-874-721 MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, MEMORANDUM* Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 10, 2021** Pasadena, California Before: GRABER, CALLAHAN, and FORREST, Circuit Judges. Rakibul Hassan sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture based on his fear that he will be tortured if * 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). returned to Bangladesh.1 The Immigration Judge (IJ) found that Hassan was not credible because he had previously entered the United States on a false passport and was not forthright about his travel in and out of Bangladesh. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) found no clear error in the adverse credibility finding and denied immigration relief. We deny the petition. The agency’s factual determinations are reviewed for substantial evidence. Arrey v. Barr, 916 F.3d 1149, 1157 (9th Cir. 2019). We uphold “the agency’s determination unless the evidence presented would compel a reasonable finder of fact to reach a contrary result.” Flores-Vega v. Barr, 932 F.3d 878, 886 (9th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Hassan asserts that he had unequivocally demonstrated that he faces particularized threats of torture if returned to Bangladesh. Hassan testified that he was persecuted and attacked between 1996 and 2007 because of his membership in the Bangladesh National Party. However, his credibility was undermined when, after testifying that his January 2007 beating left him unable to eat, sleep, or rest comfortably, and that a doctor recommended that he rest for three months, it was revealed that he had made four trips to Thailand, Korea, and India between February 12 and April 28, 2017. His credibility was further undermined when it 1 Hassan is the lead petitioner. The other petitioners are his wife and two children who seek derivative immigration benefits. 2 was revealed that he had not informed the agency that he had previously entered the United States in 1993 and 1994 under a false identity and passport. There was also evidence that Hassan used his false identity to acquire a California driver’s license and identification when he entered the United States in 2008. The IJ was not required to believe Hassan’s explanations for these inconsistencies. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th Cir. 2011) (holding that although “the IJ must give the petitioner the opportunity to provide an explanation of an apparent inconsistency,” the IJ need not accept that explanation). The agency’s adverse credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence. The adverse credibility finding also undermines Hassan’s claims for withholding of removal and CAT relief. See …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals