NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 3 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JIAN WANG, No. 17-73302 Petitioner, Agency No. A206-345-023 v. MEMORANDUM* MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 27, 2018** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Jian Wang, a native and citizen of China, petitions 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 8 * 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). 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 Wang’s testimony and documentary evidence as to the date his father died and the number of times he was interrogated. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination reasonable under “the totality of circumstances”). Wang’s explanations do not compel a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In his opening brief, Wang does not challenge the agency’s determination that in the absence of credible testimony, his documentary evidence did not establish eligibility for asylum. Thus, in the absence of credible testimony, in this case, Wang’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2013). In his opening brief, Wang fails to challenge the agency’s denial of his CAT claim. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 17-73302 17-73302 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Jian Wang v. Matthew Whitaker 3 December 2018 Agency Unpublished b024c29ef2da9f2d492f0ca4692bb2b997930d24
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals