T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T K A R E N M A R T O Y A N ; e t a l., P et i t i o n ers, v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 70227 A ge nc yN os . A 077- 849- 717

A 077- 849- 718 A 077- 849- 719 A 077- 849- 720 ME MOR AN DU M * O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r13, 2010 ** B e f o r e : S I L V E R M A N , C A L L A H A N , an dN .R . S M I T H , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . K a r e n M art oy a n a nd hi s f a m i l y , na t i ve s a nd c i t i z e ns of A rm e ni a , pe t i t i on f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ order di sm i ss i ng thei r app ea l fr om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng the i rappl i c a t i on f ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , a nd pr ot e c t i on unde rthe C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e ( “ C A T ” ) . O ur 

# FI LED SEP 24 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 70227 2 j uri sdi ct i on i s gov erned b y 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2. W e r evi ew for s ub st ant i alevi dence, I N S v . E l i as - Zac ar i as , 502 U . S . 478, 481 n. 1 ( 1992) , a nd w e di s m i s s i n parta nd d e n yin p a rt th e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . W e l ac k j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew the agency’ s det erm i nat i on thatpet i t i on er s f a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h e xtr a or di na ryc i r c um s t anc e s e xc us i ng the unt i m e l yf i l e d a s y l um ap p lic a tio n b e c au s e it is b a s e do n d is p u te df a c ts . See 8 U . S . C . § 1 15 8(a) (3); c f. R am adan v. G on zales , 47 9 F . 3d 64 6, 65 0 (9th C i r. 20 07 ) ( per c uri am ). M a rto y an o m itte da d d itio n a l in c id e n ts o f h arm , a s w e ll a s th e id e n tityo f h is a tta c k e r s f

r o m h is a s y lu m ap p lic a tio n s tate m e n t. Se e L i v . A s h c r o ft , 378 F . 3d 959, 96 2 (9th C i r. 20 04 ). H e a l so t es t i fi ed i ncon si st ent l y w i th d ocum ent ary e vi dence r e g a r d in g w h e r e h e w a s h o s p ita liz e din 1 9 9 6 . Se e Pa l v . I NS , 204 F . 3d 935, 938 (9th C i r. 20 00 ) ( i ncon si st enci es betw ee n t es t i m on y and do cum ent ary e vi dence supp ortan advers e c re di bi l i ty f i nd i ng ). B ec ause the agency r ea sonabl y f ou nd that M art oyan’ s e xp l anat i on s f or the di sc re panci es w er e uncon vi nci ng , subst ant i al e v id e n c e s up p o rts th e a g e n c y ’s a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityd e te rm in a tio n . See W an g v. I NS , 352 F . 3d 1250, 1256- 57 ( 9th C i r . 2003) . A c c or di ngl y , i n the abs e nc e of c r e d ib le te s tim o n y , M a rto y a n ’s w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l c la im f

a ils . See Farah v. A s h c r o ft , 3 4 8 F .3 d1 1 5 3 , 1 1 5 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) .07- 70227 3 M art oyan’ s C A T cl ai m al so fa i l s bec ause i ti s bas ed on the sam e e vi dence the agency f

ou nd no tcr edi bl e, and h e does notpo i ntt o any evi dence i n the re cord tha tw oul d c om pe l af

i ndi ng i ti s m or e l i ke l ythan nothe w oul d be t ortur e d i f he r e tu rn e dto A rm e n ia . Se e id. a t 1 1 5 6 - 5 7 . P E T I T I O N F O R R E V I E W D I S M I S S E D in p a r t ; D E N I E D in p a r t .