NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 19 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT YING CHEN, No. 15-73593 Petitioner, Agency No. A208-082-160 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 17, 2021** San Francisco, California Before: WATFORD and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and KORMAN,*** District Judge. Ying Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review from an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding the denial of her claims * 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). *** The Honorable Edward R. Korman, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation. for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. Chen claims that she was persecuted by police in China on account of her Christianity. The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) found Chen’s testimony not credible. The BIA held that the IJ’s adverse credibility determination was “amply supported by the record” and dismissed Chen’s appeal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition. Chen alleges that she was arrested while passing out flyers with a Christian group in China. According to Chen, she was detained by police for three days, during which she was handcuffed and interrogated about her religious activities. In upholding the IJ’s adverse credibility determination, the BIA cited three of the IJ’s findings.1 Each of those findings is supported by substantial evidence. 1. The BIA cited an inconsistency between Chen’s testimony about the name of her church and the name stated on a church certificate in the administrative record. When asked for the name of her church, Chen testified that the church’s name was “Ziwouwo” and that the “literal translation of the church name is Nourishing Me.” On cross-examination, the Government asked Chen why 1 The Government argues that the entirety of the IJ’s credibility determination is properly before us, see Morgan v. Mukasey, 529 F.3d 1202, 1206 (9th Cir. 2008), and that we should therefore consider a fourth inconsistency in Chen’s testimony about her passport that the IJ cited but that the Board did not specifically mention. We need not decide whether to consider the passport testimony, however, because the adverse credibility determination is adequately supported by the findings that the BIA did mention. 2 her church certificate said that the church’s name was “Fuzhou City Mawei Kuaian Christian Church.” Chen explained that she had misspoken and that Ziwouwo was the name of “the church activities,” whereas the name on the certificate was correct. Given that Chen was explicitly asked to provide the name of her church and not its activities, a reasonable factfinder would not be compelled to conclude that the agency’s …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals