Case: 20-60543 Document: 00516062739 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/20/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 20, 2021 No. 20-60543 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Carlos Neftali Banos-Megar, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A206 456 299 Before Jolly, Willett, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Carlos Neftali Banos-Megar, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The immigration judge (IJ) denied his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the convention against torture (CAT) based * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-60543 Document: 00516062739 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/20/2021 No. 20-60543 on an adverse credibility finding. The BIA upheld the credibility finding and found that he had failed to meet the burden of proof for asylum and withholding of removal. The BIA also found that Banos-Megar had waived any challenge to denial of relief under the CAT by failing to brief the issue. On appeal, Banos-Megar argues that the adverse credibility finding was not supported by substantial evidence. We generally review only decisions of the BIA. Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 593 (5th Cir. 2007). However, when the IJ’s ruling affects the BIA’s decision, as it does here, we review the decisions of both the BIA and the IJ. Id. Factual findings are reviewed for substantial evidence, and constitutional claims and questions of law are reviewed de novo. Fuentes-Pena v. Barr, 917 F.3d 827, 829 (5th Cir. 2019); Orellana–Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012). Although Banos-Megar suggests possible explanations for the negative credibility factors, the record does not compel the conclusion that he should have been found credible. Mwembie v. Gonzales, 443 F.3d 405, 410 (5th Cir. 2006). The inconsistencies listed by the IJ are accurate reflections of the record. His explanations for the inconsistencies are not more compelling than the IJ’s conclusions. Morales v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 812, 817 (5th Cir. 2017). The petition for review is DENIED. 2 20-60543 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ca5 5th Cir. Banos-Megar v. Garland 20 October 2021 Immigration Unpublished 6b6963fcbb047478aa0a8f70e6857272fc4de206
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals