09 -16 43 -ag

Chen v. Holder BIA Laf orest, IJ A094 917 764 

### UNITE D STATES C OURT OF AP PEALS FOR T HE SE COND CIRCU IT 

# SUM MARY ORDE R

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL E F F ECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERM I TTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan 3 United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of 4 New York, on the 24 day of March, two thousand ten. th 5 6 PRESENT: 7 RALPH K. WINTER, 8 JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 9 GERARD E. LYNCH, 10 Circuit Judges . 11

_______________________________________ 12 13 SONG CHEN, 14 Petitioner , 15 16 v. 09-1643-ag 17 NAC 18 ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., UNITED STATES 19 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 20 Respondent . 21

_______________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Sheema Chaudhry, New York, New York. 24 25 FOR RESPONDENT: Tony West, Assistant Attorney 26 General; Cindy S. Ferrier, Senior 27 Litigation Counsel; Kimberly A. 28 Burdge, Trial Attorney, Office of 29 Immigration Litigation, United 30 States Department of Justice, 31 Washington, D.C.2 1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 2 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 3 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, that the petition for review 4 is DENIED. 5 Song Chen, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, 6 seeks review of a March 26, 2009, order 7 of the BIA affirming the January 8, 2008, decision of 8 Immigration Judge (“IJ”) Brigitte Laforest, which denied his 9 application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief 1 0 under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Song 11 Chen , No. A094 917 764 (B.I.A. Mar. 26, 2009), aff’gNo. A094 917 764 1 2 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Jan. 8, 2008). We assume 1 3 the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 1 4 procedural history in this case. 1 5 Under the circumstances of this case, we review the 1 6 decision of the IJ as supplemented by the BIA. See Yan Chen 17 v. Gonzales , 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). The 1 8 applicable standards of review are well-established. See 8 1 9 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); see also Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey , 534 F.3d 162, 165-66 (2d Cir. 2008) . 203

Substantial evidence supports the 1 IJ’s adverse 2 credibility finding. See Xiu Xia Lin , 534 F.3d at 167; see also 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii). 3

I 4 n making her adverse credibility determination, the IJ found that: (1) 5 Chen gave inconsistent dates regarding when 6 he was allegedly arrested in China; (2) although Chen 7 testified that his father was still in hiding in China, his 8 father’s letter stated that he currently lives at home; (3) 9 Chen failed to mention during his credible fear interview 1 0 that he was arrested in China for promoting Falun Gong; and 1 1 (4) Chen failed to corroborate his claim that he practices Falun Gong in the United States. 1 2 Such were adequate bases 1 3 for the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. See 8 1 4 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii); Biao Yang v. Gonzales , 496 F.3d 268, 273 (2d Cir. 2007). 1 5 To the extent that Chen offered 1 6 explanations, the IJ was not compelled to credit them. See Majidi v. Gonzales , 430 F.3d 77, 80-81 (2d Cir. 2005). 17 For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is 18 1 9 DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of 2 0 removal that the Court previously granted in this petition 2 1 is VACATED, and any pending motion for a stay of removal in 2 2 this petition is DISMISSED as moot. Any pending request for4 1 oral argument in this petition is DENIED in accordance with 2 Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2), and Second 3 Circuit Local Rule 34.1(b). 4 5 FOR THE COURT: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk 6 7 8