Manish Kumar v. Eric Holder, Jr.

470 F. App'x 542
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 28, 2012
Docket10-71241
StatusUnpublished

This text of 470 F. App'x 542 (Manish Kumar v. Eric Holder, Jr.) 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
Manish Kumar v. Eric Holder, Jr., 470 F. App'x 542 (9th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Adama Diallo, a native and citizen of Mauritania, petitions 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 factual findings, Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on the omission from Diallo’s initial asylum application and his 2006 declaration that he and his parents were slaves, and the discrepancy between his testimony and his application regarding whether he escaped to Senegal or was taken there by force. See Kohli v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th Cir.2007); Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th Cir.2011) (“An IJ is not obliged to provide a protracted written or oral analysis of the alien’s proffered explanation.”). In the absence of credible testimony, Diallo’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah, 348 F.3d at 1156.

Because Diallo’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony the agency found not credible, and he points to no other evidence showing it is more likely than not he will be tortured if returned to Mauritania, his CAT claim also 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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

Related

Rizk v. Holder
629 F.3d 1083 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
Jamal Ali Farah v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General
348 F.3d 1153 (Ninth Circuit, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
470 F. App'x 542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manish-kumar-v-eric-holder-jr-ca9-2012.