Case ID: f-appx_649/html/0464-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

YONGJIAN SONG, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 13-74224.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 26, 2016.
    
    Filed April 29, 2016.
    Yongjian Song, San Gabriel, CA, pro se.
    Sheri Robyn Glaser, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Gladys Marta Stef-fens Guzman, Esquire, Trial, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. '
    Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P, 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Yongjian Song, 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 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 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), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on the inconsistencies regarding Song’s bail receipt, the dates of his arrest and last church meeting in China, and his vague and nonresponsive testimony. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1045, 1048 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under the totality of the circumstances). Song’s explanations do not compel the contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.2000). In the absence of credible testimony, Song’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Finally, Song’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same testimony the agency found not credible, and Song does not point to any evidence that otherwise compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not he would be tortured if returned to China. 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.