Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-03-03475/USCOURTS-ca8-03-03475-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
John Ashcroft
Respondent
Elton Ndreko
Petitioner

Document Text:

1

The IJ’s decision, therefore, constitutes the final agency determination for

purposes of judicial review. See Dominguez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 678, 679 n.1 (8th

Cir. 2003); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(4) (2004).

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-3475

___________

Elton Ndreko, *

*

Petitioner, *

* Petition for Review

v. * of an Order of the

* Board of Immigration Appeals.

John Ashcroft, Attorney General *

of the United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Respondent. *

___________

Submitted: December 30, 2004

Filed: January 11, 2005

___________

Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Elton Ndreko, a citizen of Albania, petitions for review of an order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed without opinion an

Immigration Judge’s (IJ’s) denial of asylum and related relief.1

 On appeal, Ndreko

challenges the IJ’s adverse credibility determination.

Appellate Case: 03-3475 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/11/2005 Entry ID: 1853859 
-2-

After careful review of the record, we conclude that the IJ’s decision on

Ndreko’s asylum application is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a

whole. See Menendez-Donis v. Ashcroft, 360 F.3d 915, 917-19 (8th Cir. 2004)

(standard of review). The IJ discredited Ndreko’s testimony because it was vague,

meager, and inconsistent with the documentary evidence, and because Ndreko

submitted documents whose authenticity was questionable. Because it was supported

by specific, cogent reasons for disbelief, we defer to the credibility finding. See

Nyama v. Ashcroft, 357 F.3d 812, 816-17 (8th Cir. 2004) (per curiam) (deference

standard); Daiga v. INS, 183 F.3d 797, 798 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (upholding

adverse credibility finding where alien offered inconsistent testimony and submitted

questionable documents). Ndreko’s request for withholding of removal thus fails as

well. See Kratchmarov v. Heston, 172 F.3d 551, 555 (8th Cir. 1999) (withholding-ofremoval standard is more difficult to meet than asylum standard).

Accordingly, we deny the petition.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 03-3475 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/11/2005 Entry ID: 1853859