NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 17 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GUANG RI JIN, No. 13-74419 Petitioner, Agency No. A087-609-066 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 11, 2018** Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. Guang Ri Jin, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under * 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). 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on inconsistencies between Jin’s testimony and documentary evidence, and Jin’s failure to submit adequate corroboration of the payments for his alleged release from detention. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination reasonable under “the totality of circumstances”). Jin’s explanations do not compel a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible testimony, Jin’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). Jin’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same testimony the agency found not credible, and Jin does not point to any other evidence in the record that compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of China. Id. at 1157. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 13-74419 13-74419 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Guang Jin v. Jefferson Sessions 17 April 2018 Agency Unpublished 57e040f0f27d195879df78180cebb8837eb57e9a
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals