Case: 20-60423 Document: 00515860651 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 13, 2021 No. 20-60423 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Subin Bhandari, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A201 753 164 Before Haynes, Willett, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Subin Bhandari, a native and citizen of Nepal, petitions for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). He argues that the BIA erred in upholding the immigration judge’s (IJ’s) adverse credibility finding regarding portions of his testimony and in dismissing his appeal of the * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 20-60423 Document: 00515860651 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2021 No. 20-60423 IJ’s denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Bhandari also moves for a stay of removal. We generally review only the BIA’s decision; the IJ’s decision is reviewed only if, as here, it influenced the BIA. See Singh v. Sessions, 880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018). Credibility findings, as well as determinations that an alien is not eligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT relief, are factual findings. Morales v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 812, 817 (5th Cir. 2017); Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). We review such factual findings for substantial evidence, requiring the alien to show that “the evidence was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could conclude against it.” Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536-37 (5th Cir. 2009) (quote at 537). Here, the BIA upheld the IJ’s adverse credibility finding with regard to Bhandari’s testimony that the Maoists who had attacked him in December 2017 repeatedly looked for him at his parents’ home thereafter and advised his parents in November 2018 that they were going to kill him. The IJ found implausible Bhandari’s assertion that the attackers must have identified his parents and their homeplace through a network of spies. The BIA added that Bhandari had not identified any evidence of such a Maoist spy network in the country conditions documents and that Bhandari’s supporting affidavits simply parroted his testimony. The IJ and the BIA were entitled to consider the inherent plausibility of Bhandari’s and his witnesses’ statements and whether his testimony was consistent with other record evidence, such as country conditions documentation. See Avelar-Oliva v. Barr, 954 F.3d 757, 763-64 (5th Cir. 2020). Given that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was not clearly unreasonable under the totality of the circumstances, the BIA’s decision to 2 Case: 20-60423 Document: 00515860651 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/13/2021 No. 20-60423 uphold the finding was supported by substantial evidence. See Morales, 860 F.3d at 817. The BIA acted properly …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals