NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 22 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT QIANG SUN, No. 14-72106 Petitioner, Agency No. A087-843-661 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted January 16, 2018** Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Qiang Sun, 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 protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction * 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). under 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 as to where Sun sought medical treatment after allegedly being beaten, and when he first decided to leave China. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination reasonable under “the totality of circumstances”). Sun’s explanation as to why he testified inconsistently about when he first left China does not compel a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). Thus, in the absence of credible testimony, in this case, Sun’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Huang v. Holder, 744 F.3d 1149, 1156 (9th Cir. 2014). Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Sun’s CAT claim because it is based on the same testimony the agency found not credible, and Sun 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 a public official in China. See id. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 14-72106 14-72106 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Qiang Sun v. Jefferson Sessions 22 January 2018 Agency Unpublished a8dba5c9cb171cb92e8aa1d5b3971c94c13acf4d
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals