Gang Tian v. Holder

Ninth Circuit

Gang Tian v. Holder

432 F. App'x 667

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 6, 2011

Docket08-70564

StatusUnpublished

This text of 432 F. App'x 667 (Gang Tian v. Holder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gang Tian v. Holder, 432 F. App'x 667 (9th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Gang Tian, 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 (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination because Tian’s testimony about his duties and activities as a police officer was materially inconsistent with his declaration. See Kohli v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th Cir.2007). In the absence of credible testimony, Tian failed to establish eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal. *669 See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Tian’s contention that the IJ failed to address his CAT claim is not supported by the record. Because Tian’s CAT claim is based on the same evidence the agency found not credible and he points to no further evidence to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured if returned to China, his CAT claim fails. See id. at 1156-57.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM **

Gang Tian, 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 (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination because Tian’s testimony about his duties and activities as a police officer was materially inconsistent with his declaration. See Kohli v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th Cir.2007). In the absence of credible testimony, Tian failed to establish eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal. *669 See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Tian’s contention that the IJ failed to address his CAT claim is not supported by the record. Because Tian’s CAT claim is based on the same evidence the agency found not credible and he points to no further evidence to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured if returned to China, his CAT claim fails. See id. at 1156-57.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

432 F. App'x 667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gang-tian-v-holder-ca9-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack