Xinai He v. Loretta E. Lynch

Ninth Circuit

Xinai He v. Loretta E. Lynch

621 F. App'x 400

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedOctober 22, 2015

Docket13-72309

StatusUnpublished

This text of 621 F. App'x 400 (Xinai He v. Loretta E. Lynch) 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

Xinai He v. Loretta E. Lynch, 621 F. App'x 400 (9th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Xinai He, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction 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, 1039^0 (9th Cir.2010). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA found He was not credible based on the omission of material events from his asylum application and declaration, as well as his failure to seek corroboration from his brother who lived nearby, and his explanation for failing to do so. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility finding reasonable under totality of the circumstances); see also Kin v. Holder, 595 F.3d 1050, 1057 (9th Cir.2010) (omission from asylum applications of key event forming basis for petitioners’ claim supported adverse credibility finding). We reject He’s contention that the BIA distorted or mis-characterized the record. In the absence of credible testimony, He’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

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

MEMORANDUM **

Xinai He, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction 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, 1039^0 (9th Cir.2010). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA found He was not credible based on the omission of material events from his asylum application and declaration, as well as his failure to seek corroboration from his brother who lived nearby, and his explanation for failing to do so. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility finding reasonable under totality of the circumstances); see also Kin v. Holder, 595 F.3d 1050, 1057 (9th Cir.2010) (omission from asylum applications of key event forming basis for petitioners’ claim supported adverse credibility finding). We reject He’s contention that the BIA distorted or mis-characterized the record. In the absence of credible testimony, He’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

621 F. App'x 400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/xinai-he-v-loretta-e-lynch-ca9-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack