FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T NOV 21, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---

No. 0 7- 15 97 3 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---- Age nc y No. A9 8- 73 9- 81 6 JI E LIU, Pet it io ne r,
ve rs us U.S. ATTO RNEY GENERAL, Res po nd en t.

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- - Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of aDeci si on of t he Bo ardof I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- - (No ve m ber 2 1, 2 00 8) Befo re EDMONDSON, Ch ie f Ju dg e, BLACK an d P RYOR, Ci rcu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM: Ji e Liu , a na ti ve an d c it iz enof C hi naap pe ari ng pro se, p et it io ns forrev ie w of th e o rd er b y

th e Bo ardof I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s (“ BIA”) th ataffi rm edth e de ci si on of t he Im

m ig rat io n J ud ge (“ IJ ”). The de ci si onde ni edasylu m ,withh ol di ng of r em ov al , andrel ie f un de r th e Uni te d Nat io ns Co nv en ti on Agai ns t

Tortur e an d Ot he r Cru el , Inh um an , or Deg rad in g Tre atm en t o r Puni sh m en t (“ CAT”). No rev ers ib le erro r ha s b een sh own ; we d en y th e p et it io n i n p artan d 1 di sm is s i t i n p art . W e rev ie w th e d eci si on s o f th e IJ an d t he BIA in th is cas e. See Al Najjar v. Ash cro ft, 2 57 F.3d12 62 , 12 84 (11 th Cir . 20 01 ) (n ot in g t ha t we re vi ew th e BIA’s de ci si on ; b ut“ [i]ns of

ar as th e [BI A] ad op ts th e IJ ’s reas on in g, we wi ll rev ie w th e IJ ’s dec is io n a s wel l” ). W e rev ie w de n ov o l eg al de te rm in at io ns of t he IJ a ndBIA. Id . Factua l d et erm in at io ns are re vi ewedun de r th e “ hi gh ly defer en ti al ” subs ta nt ia l
ev id en ce t es t; an d we m

us t “ affi rm

th e . . . deci si on if i t i s s up po rte d b y
reas on ab le , subs ta nt ia l, an d p ro ba ti ve ev id en ce o n the reco rdco ns id eredas who le .” Fo rg ue v. U.S. Att orne y Gen., 4 01 F.3d12 82 , 12 86 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ) (ci ta ti on om it te d) . There fo re, a fi nd in g o f fac t wi ll be rev ers edon ly whe n t he
reco rdco m

pe ls , in st eadof m erel y

supp orts , a rev ers al . Alim v. Go nz al es , 44 6 F .3d12 39 , 12 54 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). An al ie n m ay

ob ta in asylum

if h e is a “ refu ge e,” tha t i s, a p ers on un ab le or
un wil li ng to return t o h is co un try of n at io na li ty “be cau se of p ers ecu ti on or awell

On appea l, L iu does not offe r arg ument on th e denial of CAT relief ; there fore , this claim is 1 abandone d. See Sepulveda v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 401 F.3d 1226, 1228 n.2 (11th Cir. 2005) (explaining that a

petitioner aba

ndons an issue by

failingto offer

argument on that issue). 2fo un de d fe ar o f pe rs ecu ti on on acco un t o f” a p ro te ct edgro un d, i nc lu di ng po li ti cal

op in io n. 8 U.S.C. §§ 11 01 (a)( 42 )(A); 11 58 (a)( 1) , (b) (1 ). The as y lu m ap pl ic an t be ars th e b ur de n o f pr ov in g s ta tu to ry “ refu ge e” s ta tu s wi th sp eci fic an d c red ib le
ev id en ce. Fo rg ue , 40 1 F .3dat 1 28 6- 87
. Liuso ug htasylum

ba se d o n h is m em

be rs hi p i n t he Ch in es e Dem oc rat ic Part y (“ CDP”) , whi ch he joi ne d s ev eral m on th s af te r co m in g t o t he Uni te d S ta te s in May 200 4. Liucla im edth athe (1) recru it edne w m em be rs to th e CDP i n C hi na , in cl ud in g s om e o f hi s fo rm er co worke rs , (2) di st rib ut edli te ratur e ab ou t the CDP
on th e st reet s o f New York, an d (3 ) wro te art ic le s o n t op ic s s uc h a s fr eed om of sp eech , andpubl is he d t he m on th e in te rn et . Liu c la im edth atth e Ch in es e go ve rn m en t (1 ) kn ew ab ou t h is act iv it ie s i n t he Uni te d S ta te s an d wo ul d a rres t h im if h e returne d t o C hi naan d (2 ) ha d c on ta ct edan d h aras se d h is wife -- who
rem ai ne d i n C hi na-- ab ou t h is act s i n t he Uni te d S ta te s. The IJ d et erm in edth atLiuwas n otcred ib le ba se d o n t he fol lo win g t hi ng s: (1 ) he co ns ul te d C hi ne se let te rin g o n h is ha nddu rin g h is tes ti m on y , bu t d idno t
ex pl ai n wh atpu rp os e itserve d o r why he was lo ok in g a t i t wh il e te st ifyin g; (2) he te st ifi edth athe joi ne d the CDP in New Yorkon 8 Dec em be r 20 04 bu t al so te st ifi edth atth e Ch in es e g ov ern m en t co nt act edhi s wi fe the same day ab ou t h is act iv it ie s i n t he Uni te d S ta te s; (3) he di d n otjoi n t he CDP unt il aft er h is vi sa 3ex pi red , bu t h is act s upo n i ni ti al ly com in g t o t he Uni te d S ta te s i nd ic at edth athe

ha d n o i nt en ti on of r eturni ng to Ch in a; an d (4 ) he fai le d t o s ub m itaffi da vi ts fro m
an y on e in Ch in a ab ou t the go ve rn m en t’s al le ge d kno wled ge of h is po li ti cal act iv it ie s. Th e BIA ag reedwith t he IJ’s ad ve rs e cre di bi li ty det erm in at io n. On ap pe al , Liuarg ue s tha t the IJ’s an d B IA’s adve rs e cre di bi li ty de te rm in at io n was no t s up po rte d b y subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce an d was ba se d o n m in or in co ns is te nc ie s. Liuals o a ss ert s t ha t the IJ andBIA fai le d t o c on si de r hi s
subm it te d e vi de nc e. W e d is ag ree. An ad ve rs e cre di bi li ty det erm in at io n a lo ne m ay be su ffi ci en t t o s up po rt t he de ni al of a sylum

rel ie f. For gu e, 40 1 F .3dat 1 28 7. Bu t “ anadve rs e cre di bi li ty de te rm in at io n d oe s n otall ev ia te th e IJ ’s du ty to co ns id er o th er ev id en ce p ro du ced by an as y lu m

ap pl ic an t.” Id . “ A cred ib il it y de te rm in at io n, l ik e an y

factfin di ng , m ay no t b e o ve rtu rn edun le ss th e rec or d c om pe ls it .” Id . (in te rn al qu ot at io n
om it te d)
. The IJ a ndBIA p ro vi de d s pe ci fic an d c og en t re as on s fo r th e cre di bi li ty de te rm in at io n, wh ic h i s s up po rte d b y subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce. See D-Mu hu m edv. U.S. Att orne y

Gen., 3 88 F.3d81 4, 8 19 (11 th Cir . 20 04 ). Nothi ng in th e rec or d
co m pe ls us to subs ti tu te ou r jud gm en t o n t he is su e. Liu ’s tes ti m on y ab ou t the Ch in es e g ov ern m en t’s al le ge d kno wled ge of h is po li ti cal act iv it ie s i n the Uni te d
4St at es -- th e b as is of h is asylu m cla im -- was no t p laus ib le . He tes ti fie d t ha t Ch in es e o ffi ci al s co nt act edhi s wi fe i n C hi naab ou t h is act iv it ie s i n t he Uni te d St at es th e sa m e d ay

he joi ne d t he CDP in New York ; an d Li u h adno pri or hi st ory of po li ti cal act iv it y

in Ch in a. Als o, Li u g ota job as atru ck -driv er wh enhe fir st arri ve d i n the Uni te d S ta te s an d t es ti fie d t ha t h e d idno t p lan t o re tu rnto Ch in a; bu t h e d idno t jo in th e CDP u nt il aft er h is vi saex pi red . He learne d o f th e po ss ib il it y

forasylum

fro m ot he r CDP m em

be rs . Thu s, as th e IJ no te d, i t ap pe ars th atLiu ’s po li ti cal act s wer e u nd ert ak enforth e p ur po se of app lying forasylum . Tha t Li u c on su lt edCh in es e wri ti ng on hi s h an d wh il e te st ifyin g a ls o c al ls in to do ub t the tru th fu ln es s o f hi s t es ti m on y . 2 The weak er anap pl ic an t’s t es ti m on y , th e g reat er the ne edfor co rro bo rat iv e
ev id en ce. Yan g v . U.S. Atto rn ey Gen., 4 18 F.3d11 98 , 12 01 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). Here, the IJ c on si de redth e ev id en ce s ub m it te d b y Liu , whi ch in cl ud ed ph ot og rap hs of h im

all eg ed ly atte nd in g C DP m eet in gs an d d is tri bu ti ng CDP li te ratur e, an d a rti cl es he all eg ed ly wro te an d p ub li sh edon th e in te rn et . Butth e IJ di d n otco ns id er the ph ot og rap hs he lp fu l t o Li u’s cl ai m be cau se th ey

ha d b een ta ke n wi th in ho ur s o f eac h o th er, an d t he IJ n ot edth atth e art ic le s, b y th em se lv es ,
At the h ea ri n g, L i u stated that the writing was only his name in Chinese. The I J asked the 2 interpre ter to translate the writing and, although the translation is not entirely clea r in the transcript, the translation does indicate that the writing wa s more than L iu’s name. 5di d n otten d t o c orro bo rat e h is tes ti m on y th atCh in es e o ffi ci al s wer e ta rg et in g hi m . As the IJ andBIA co rrec tl y no te d, Li u p ro du cedno ev id en ce -- su ch as a n 3 affi da vi t fr om

hi s wi fe -- t ha t co rro bo rat edhi s t es ti m on y th atCh in es e o ffi ci al s kn ew ab ou t h is po li ti cal act iv it ie s i n t he Uni te d S ta te s. In su m , th e IJ an d B IA pr ov id edco ge ntreas on s fo r th e cre di bi li ty det erm in at io n: an d t he se reas on s ar e
supp orte d b y

subs ta nt ia l re co rdev id en ce. See D-Mu hu m ed , 38 8 F .3dat 8 19 . W e de ny thi s p artof t he pe ti ti on . Liune xtarg ue s t ha t h is du e p ro ces s ri gh ts were v io la te d wh enth e IJ de ni ed hi s re qu es ts fora ch an ge of v enue an d fo r a co nt in ua nc e so th athi s l awy er wo ul d ha ve ti m e to pro pe rly prep are f orth e h eari ng . Liu a ls o c om pl ai ns of i na de qu at e tra ns la ti on at t he asylu m

he ari ng . Becau se Liufai le d t o p res en t the se du e p ro ces s cl ai m s i n h is ap pe al to th e BIA an d, the refo re, fai le d t o e xh au sthi s adm in is tra ti ve
rem ed ie s o n t he se cla im s, we l ackjuri sd ic ti onto co ns id er the m . See Am ay aArtu ndua gav. U.S. Att orne y Gen., 4 63 F.3d12 47 , 12 51 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ) (ex pl ai ni ng th atanali en ’s “ al le ga ti on of adu e p ro ces s v io la ti on. . . is pre ci se ly

On appea l, L iu claims that the I J did not consider the State Depa rtment’s Country Report on 3 China. But t h e I J clea

rly considere d all the evidenc e submitt ed by L iu, even if not specific ally ref ere nced in the I J ’s oral decision. St i l l , the C ountry Report does not corroborate L iu’s persona l experience s with the Chinese g overnme nt. 6th e k in d o f pr oc edur al erro r whi ch requi res ex haus ti on ”). The refo re, we d is m is s

th is pa rt o f th e p et it io n fo r rev ie w. PETITION DENIED IN PART, DISMI SSED IN PART.

7