NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_________________ No. 1 2

- 1652

_________________ AMADOU KAMARA ,

Petitioner

v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES , Respondent

____________________________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A089

- 082

- 774 ) Immigration Judge: Honorable Mirlande Tadal

____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

November 6, 2012 Before: AMBRO, HARDI MAN and ROTH , Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed November 8, 2012 )

_________________ OPINION

_________________ PER CURIAM Amadou Kamara petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). For the reasons below, we will deny the petition for revi ew. Kamara, a citizen of Gu in ea, entered the United States in March 2008 using a fraudulent travel document

. On March 10, 2008, Kamara was charged as removable as2

an alien who sought to procure an immigration benefit through misrepresentation or fraud

an d as an alien who is not in possession of a valid entry document. Kamara conceded removability on the latter charge and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). He argued that he would be persecut ed based on his political beliefs or tortured if removed to Guinea

. After a hearing, an Immigration Judge found Kamara not credible and denied relief. On appeal, the BIA remanded the matter for a new credibility determination after concluding that the
IJ had made two errors in her determination. The BIA noted that the IJ had also given numerous other valid reasons for the adverse credibility determination. On remand, the IJ again found Kamara not credible . On appeal, t he BIA upheld the adverse credibil ity finding and dismissed the appeal. It also noted that Kamara had not provided corroborating evidence to support his claim. Kamara , who had been represented by counsel, filed a pro se petition for review. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. T o establish eligibility for asylum,
Kamara needed to demonstrate either past persecution or a well

- founded fear of future persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. See Wang v. Gon zales , 405 F.3d 134, 138 (3d Cir. 2005). If credible, an alien’s testimony by itself can satisfy the burden to establish a claim for
relief. Butt v. Gonzales , 429 F.3d 430, 433 (3d Cir. 2005). A n adverse credibility determination is a factual finding th at, if supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence , will be upheld. Abulashvili v. Att’y Gen. , 663 F.3d 197, 202 (3d Cir.3

2011). W e must uphold the adverse credibility finding unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conc lude to the contrary. Fiadjoe v. Att’y Gen. , 411 F. 3d 135, 153 (3d Cir. 2005). On remand, t he IJ found Kamara’s story of obtaining his travel document implausible because he stated that his fiancée’s brother tried to get the travel document
for him afte r an incident in September 2007. The IJ noted that there was evidence in the Government’s records of photographs of Kamara taken for the application in July 2006 and March 2007

. A.R. at 1353

- 54

. The IJ also opined that Kamara’s testimony regarding his attendance at the University was evasive and unresponsive and he failed to recall specific details about events he claimed to be involved in. In addition, the IJ pointed out that Kamara had submitted a letter from a friend, Sekou Conde , who stated that Ka mara had been subject to questioning by the security services and great cruelties

. A.R. at 1020. Kamara , however, had not testified to any questioning or cruelty. The IJ also mentioned that a forensic document examiner opined that his high school identi ty card was altered. A.R. at 280

- 81. The IJ reasonably relie d on these inconsistencies and the opinion of the forensic examiner in finding Kamara not credible. In his brief, Kamara argues that he was mistakenly considered not credible due to a language barrier. However, he does not point to any specific testimony or evidence which might have been translated incorrectly or any questions he might not have understood

. The DHS agent who conducted Kamara’s airport interview testified that4

Kamara appeared to clearly understand the questions asked of him using the Mandingo interpreter. A.R. at 290.
Kamara also contends that the DHS agent who detained him mistakenly stated that Kamara was a Liberian national. He appears to believe that he was denied reli ef based on th is mistake regarding his nationality. Kamara attempted to enter the United States with a fraudulent asylee document of an alien from Liberia. A.R. at 74

- 75. He signed a statement from his airport interview indicating that he was born in Li beria. A.R. at 170 , 1359 . The DHS agent at the airport testified that Kamara stated that he had been born in Liberia. Kamara denied making this statement. A.R. at 848

. A ny confusion over his nationality is due to Kamara’s own actions and statements

. Moreover, the IJ did not base her adverse credibility finding or denial of relief on this issue. Kamara has not shown that the record would compel a ny reasonable adjudicator to conclude that he is credible. Thus, he is not entitled to asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT relief. Accordingly, we will deny the petition for review.