NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 11 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BIKASH KUNWAR, No. 16-73914 Petitioner, Agency No. A205-853-171 v. MEMORANDUM* ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 9, 2021** San Francisco, California Before: WALLACE, GOULD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Bikash Kunwar, a native citizen of Nepal, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (Board) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition. * 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). Where, as here, the Board has incorporated portions of the IJ’s decision as its own, “we treat the incorporated parts of the IJ’s decision as the” Board’s. In reviewing the Board’s decision, “we consider only the grounds relied upon by that [A]gency.” Santiago-Rodriguez v. Holder, 657 F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir. 2011) (citations omitted). We review the IJ’s factual findings, including adverse credibility determinations, for substantial evidence. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010). These findings “are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” Yali Wang v. Sessions, 861 F.3d 1003, 1007 (9th Cir. 2017) (citation omitted). We review the IJ’s and the Board’s (collectively, the Agency) legal conclusions de novo. Santiago-Rodriguez, 657 F.3d at 829. Kunwar asserts he is a member of the Nepali Congress Party (NCP) and fears harm by the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (Maoist) if returned to Nepal. Kunwar alleges that members of the Maoist party threatened him because of his political affiliation and his participation in small rallies against them. The Maoists allegedly demanded Kunwar pay a “donation” or “something bad [would] happen to [him]” because he spoke out against the Maoist party. Over the summer of 2012, the Maoists allegedly called him, went to his home, and went to his workplace at the family rice mill to threaten him, demand money, and insist that he join the Maoist party. Eventually the Maoists allegedly beat him at his family’s rice mill, but he 2 managed to escape. Kunwar fled Nepal shortly thereafter. Kunwar never reported these incidents to the police because he thought they were afraid of the Maoists too. The IJ denied Kunwar’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection pursuant to the Convention Against Torture (CAT) on adverse credibility grounds. The IJ found that Kunwar was not credible because of the implausibility of aspects of his claim, his attempted embellishments, as well as significant inconsistencies in his testimony and between his testimony and submitted documentation. We hold that substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Kunwar was not credible. …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals