N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
AB DUL M ATIN, Pe titione r,
v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 11-73421 Age n c y No. A099-418-346
M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d August 7, 2015 ** Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia B e fore : SILVER

M AN, SAC K *** , a

nd WARDLAW , C i rc uit Judge s. Abdul M a tin, a

native a nd c itiz e n of B an gla de sh, pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a l s’ s (B IA) de c ision a ffirm ing the Im m igration Judge ’ s 

# FIL ED AUG 11 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2). *** The Honora

ble R obe rt D. Sa c k , Se nior C i rc u it Judgefor the U.S. C ourt of Appe a ls for the Se c ond C irc uit, sitting by de signa tion.(IJ) de nia l of his a pplic a tion for a sy lum , withholding of re m ova l, a n d prote c tion unde r the C onve n tion Aga inst Torture(C A T). W e have jurisdic t ion pursua nt to 8 U.S.C . § 1252, a

nd we de ny

the pe tition for re v ie w . 1. M a tin’ s a s y lum a

pplic a tion wa s file d m ore tha n one y e ar a fte r he e nte re d the U nite d State s, a

nd M a tin is una

ble to e sta

blish ine ffe c tive a ssista

nc e of c ounse l to e x c use the untim e l y

filing. Se e Tamang v . Holde r , 598 F.3d 1083, 1088-91 (9th C ir. 2010). The re ta ine r a gre e m e nt, signe d by M atin, sta t e d tha t M at in’ s attorne y wa s unde r no obliga

tion to file

the a sy lum

a pplic ation until he

re c e i ve d his full fe e . M a t in doe s not c la im that he pa id the full fe e prior to thede a dline ; be c a use the
re le va nt fa c ts a re undispute d, we have jurisdic tion ove r this issue
. Husy e v v . Muk ase y , 528 F.3d 1172, 1179-81 (9th C ir. 2008). W e a gre e with the B IA that M a t in provide d

insuffic ie nt e v ide nc e of pa ym e nt to e sta

blish tha t the untim e ly filing wa s due to ine ffe c tive a ssista nc e of c ounse l. Se e Tamang , 598 F.3d a t 1090. 2. Substa ntia l e v ide nc e supports the B IA’ s c onc lusion tha

t M at in wa s ine l igible for withholding of rem ova l. M atin e xha uste d his a dm i nistra

tive
re m e die s with re spe c t to theinc onsiste nc y be twe e n his te stim ony

and de c la

ra tion
c onc e rning the atta c k tha

t oc c urre d in 2004, so we hav e jurisdic tion to re vie w it. Se e Abe bev . Gonzale

z , 432 F.3d 1037, 1041 (9th C ir. 2005) (e n ba nc ). Howe ve r, the i nc onsiste nc ie s re lie d on by the B IA substa

n tia lly support thea dve rse 2c re d ibility

de te rm inat ion. Se e Shre

stha v
. Holde r , 590 F.3d 1034, 1039, 1046-47 (9th C ir. 2010). M a tin’ s de c la ra tion a nd te s tim ony

a bout thec irc um sta

nc e s of the 2004 a tta c k we re i nc onsiste nt, a nd M atin’ s te stim ony m ate ria lly e nha nc e d his
c la im s for re l ie f inste a d of sim ply a dding de ta ils to the

e ve nt de sc ribe d in his de c la ra tion. Se e Zamanov

v . Holde r , 649 F.3d 969, 973-74 (9th C ir. 2011); Rizk v . Holde r , 629 F.3d 1083, 1090 (9th C ir. 2011). In a ddition, M atin’ s te s tim o ny and his own witne ss’ s te stim o ny a bout whe the r M at in’ s fam ily wa s hiding, suffering,
and living in fe ar in B angla d e sh or wa s doing finewe re inc onsiste n t a nd unde rm ine d his c la im

tha t he wa s at risk of futurepe rse c ution in B angla de s h. Se e Tamang , 598 F.3d a

t 1094. M a tin’ s c orroborating e vide nc e is insuffic ie nt to inde pe nde ntly

e s ta blish pa st pe rse c ution, a s the B IA c onc l ude d. Se e Ade n v . Holde r , 589 F.3d 1040, 1046 (9th C ir. 2009); Garc ia v . Holde r , 749 F.3d 785, 791 (9th C ir. 2014). M ore ove r, M a tin c la im e d a fe a r of pe rse c ution ba se d on his
m e m b e rship in the

Awam i Le a gue , a

politic a l pa

rty tha t ha s now a ssum e d powe r. 3. Substa ntia l e v ide nc e supports the B IA’ s de te rm ination tha

t M atin is ine l igible for re lie f unde r C AT. Abse nt c re d ible te stim ony , M atin ha s not shown that it is m o re like l y

tha n not tha t he will be torture d if he re turns to B a ngla de sh. Se e Farah v
. Ashc roft , 348 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th C ir. 2003). Pe tition De nie d. 3