N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT JIHUA YANG, Pe titione r, v. ER IC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 12-72555 Age n c y No. A087-850-796 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 July 22, 2014 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, C ANB Y, a nd C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s . Jihua Ya ng, a native and c itiz e n

of C hina , pe titions pro se for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a l s’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s de c i sion de ny i ng his a pplic at ion for a s y lum , withholding of re m ova l, a

nd prote c tion unde r the C onve ntion Agai nst Torture(“ C AT” ). Our 

# FIL ED AUG 4 2014 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 oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).jurisdic tion is governe d by 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for substa ntia l e vide nc e the a ge nc y ’ s fa c tua l findings a pply ing thesta

nda rds gove rning a dve rse c re dibility de te rm i nations c re ate d

by the REAL ID Ac t. S

hre s tha v . Holde r , 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th C ir. 2010). W e de ny in pa rt a n d dismiss in pa

rt the pe tition for re vie w. The a ge n c y

found Ya ng fa ile d to m e e t his burde n of proof for a sy lum and withholding of rem o v a l be c a use he wa s not c re d ible and he fa ile d to c orroborate his c la i m s. Substa

ntia l e vide n c e supports the a ge nc y ’ s a dve rse c re dibility de te rm i nation ba se d on theinc onsiste nc y in the re c o rd re ga rding whe the r Yang ha d knowle dge of the c irc um sta nc e s of his fe llow c hurc h m e m be rs a fte r his re le a se from de te ntion, a

nd Ya ng’ s om ission from

his de c la ration tha t polic e c ontinue d to look for him

a fte r he de pa

rte d C hina . Se eid. at 1048 (a dve rse c re dibility de te rm i nation wa s re a sona ble unde r the “ tota l ity

of c irc um s ta

nc e s” ); se ealso Zamanov v . Holde r , 649 F.3d 969, 973 (9th C ir. 2011) (a dve rse c re dibility finding supporte d whe re om issions “ w e nt to c ore of [pe t itione r’ s] a lle ge d fe ar” ). The a ge nc y c onside re d Ya

ng’ s e xpla

nations a nd wa s not c om

p e lle d to a c c e pt the m . Se eZamanov , 649 F.3d a t 974. W e re

je c t Ya ng’ s c onte ntion tha

t the a ge n c y

fa ile d to c o nside r the tota lity

of c irc um sta

nc e s. W e la c k jurisdic t ion to c o nside r Yang’ s c onte ntions re g arding c orroboration be c a use he fa i le d to ra ise the m be fore the B IA.

1 2 - 7 2 5 5 5 2Se e B arron v . Ashc roft , 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th C ir. 2004). Apa rt from his une xha uste d c onte ntions, Ya

ng doe s not otherwise c ha lle nge the a g e nc y ’ s finding that he fa ile d to c o rroborate his c la im s. Thus, Ya ng’ s a sy lum

an d withholding of re m ova l c la im s fa i l. Fina lly , Ya

ng’ s C AT c la im

a lso fa ils be c a

use it is ba se d on thesa

m e te stim ony tha t the a ge n c y

found not c re dible , a

nd Ya ng doe s not point to a

ny othe r e vide nc e in the re c ord tha t c om pe ls the finding it is m

ore like ly tha n not hewould be torture d by

or with thec onse nt or a c quie sc e nc e of the C hine se gove rnm e nt if re turne d. Se eFarah v . Ashc roft , 348 F.3d 1153, 1156-57 (9th C ir. 2003). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D in par t; DISM ISSE D in par t.

1 2 - 7 2 5 5 5 3