NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 19 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARIA EVELIA REGALADO-GOMEZ, No. 18-71686 AKA Maria Evelia Regalado Gomez, AKA Maria Evelia Regalado-Gomez, AKA Agency No. A072-533-628 Yadira Salinas, Petitioner, MEMORANDUM* v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted August 12, 2020 Pasadena, California Before: CALLAHAN, BUMATAY, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges. Maria Evelia Regalado-Gomez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision dismissing her appeal and denying her motion to remand. We review legal conclusions de novo and factual findings under the highly deferential substantial evidence standard. Khan v. Holder, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. 584 F.3d 773, 776 (9th Cir. 2009). We will uphold the agency’s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Go v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1047, 1053 (9th Cir. 2011); 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (“[T]he administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b), and deny the petition. 1. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s adverse credibility finding as a basis to deny Regalado-Gomez asylum and withholding of removal. Since such findings are accorded deference, Abovian v. INS, 219 F.3d 972, 977–78 (9th Cir. 2000), we may only overturn them in “the most extraordinary circumstances.” Bingxu Jin v. Holder, 748 F.3d 959, 964 (9th Cir. 2014). Regalado-Gomez seeks asylum based on her alleged kidnapping and eight years of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of a former military member. But, as the Board found, she omitted this claim in her original 1994 asylum application and her 1995 asylum officer interview. The Board next noted that Regalado-Gomez changed her position on when her brothers and father left Guatemala three times. The Board also found implausible Regalado-Gomez’s testimony regarding her relationship with her children’s father, her story of being kidnapped in response to her father fleeing the country six years earlier, and her brothers needing to leave Guatemala at age 11 and 5 because the military accused them of being guerilla fighters. Given the totality of the circumstances, these findings of non-trivial omissions, inconsistencies, and 2 implausibilities, are well-supported by the record and are sufficient to sustain the adverse credibility determination. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th Cir. 2011) (“[W]e must uphold [an] adverse credibility determination so long as even one basis is supported by substantial evidence[.]”); Iman v. Barr, ---F.3d---, 2020 WL 5001815 (9th Cir. Aug. 25, 2020).1 2. Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s conclusion that Regalado-Gomez is not eligible for Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) protection. 1 Regalado-Gomez’s arguments on appeal do not change our analysis. First, she contends that the asylum officer’s notes are unreliable, but that argument was not raised ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals