Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d an d is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 60541 Su m m ar y Cal endar

J IANG HUI

- QI NG P et i t i on er

v. ERI C H HOLDER, J R, U S AT TORNEY GENERAL Res po nde nt

Pet i t i o n f

o rRev i e w o f

a n Ord e ro f

t he B o a r do f Im m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls B IAN o. A 94 787 616

B e fo r e K IN G , B A R K S D A L E , a n dG A R Z A , C ir c u it J u d g e s . P E R C U R IA M: * Ji ang H ui

- Q i ng, a nat ive and cit i ze n of t he Peopl e’ s R epubl i c of C hi na, peti t i on s f

or r evi ew of

a M ay 20 08 B oard o f Im m i grati on A pp eal s ( B IA) order. T h at or der a ffirm ed an i m m i grati on j u dg e’ s (IJ) F ebru ary 200 7 den i alof Pet i t i o ne r ’ s ap pl i c at i o n f o r as yl um , w i t hho l di ng o f r e m o va l , o rr e l i e f

und e rt he C o n v e n tio n A g a in s t T o r tu r e (C A T ). United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Jul y 30, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 60541

2 H aving conceded rem ovab i l i t y as an “ al i en p re se n ti n t h e U n i t ed S t ates
w i t ho utb e i ng ad m i t t e d o rpa r o l e d” , 8 U
. S. C. § 1 18 2( a) ( 6) (A) (i) , Pe t i t i o ne rs o ugh t i m m i grati on reli ef

based on hi s c l ai m ed p ersec u t i on , by C h i n ese of fi ci al s, f

or v iola tin ga n dre sis tin gC h in a ’ s fa m ily -p la n n in gp o li cy . T h e IJ d e n ied re li e f, fin d in g : P e tit io n e rw a s n o t a cr e d ib le w itn e s s ; a n d , inth e a lte r n a tiv e , h e co u ld
n otest abli sh el i gibi l i t y f or rel i ef based on hi s gi rl f

ri en d’ s f orced abort i on becau se such reli ef

i s l i m i t ed to spou ses. T h e B IAa g r e e dth a t P e tit io n e rw a s n o t e n tit le dto re lie f b a s e do n h is gi rl f ri en d’ s abort i on . I tal so noted t h at Peti t i on er m ay h ave been elig ibl e f or
r e l i e f bas e d on hi s ow n re s i s t anc e t o C hi na’ s fam i l y- pl anni ng po l i c i e s , b utf o und t hathe ha d no tm e thi s b ur de n o f pr o vi ng e l i gibil i t y f

or s uc h r e l i e f

b e c aus e he fai l ed to provi de credibl e evi den ce. Pet i t i o ne rc hall e nge s t he c r e dibil i t y de t e r m i nat i o ns m ad e b y t he I J and t h e B IA, a n dc o n t e n d s h e d e mo n s t r a t e de l i g ib i l i t yf o rr e l i e f

. O u rc o u r tr e v i e ws th e B IA ’ s ord er a n d , ad d i ti on a l l y, t h e u n d erlyingIJ d ecisi on w h ere , as inthis in s ta n c e , ith a d“ s o m e im p a c t o n th e B IA ’ s d e c is io n ”. Mi k h a e lv . I NS , 115 F. 3d 29 9 , 3 0 2 (5 th C i r. 199 7)

. “W e revi ew fact u alf i n di n gs of

t h e B IAan d IJ f

or s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e , a n dq u e s t i o n s o f l a w de no vo ”. Zhu v. G on zales , 493 F. 3d 588 , 594 ( 5th C i r. 200 7)

. F o r su bstanti al

- evi den ce r evi ew , “ w e m ay reverse a deci si on on a fact u alfin d in go n l y w h en t h e evi den ce compels u s to d o s o ”. I d. (e m p h a s is a d d e d ); seea lso Zh ang v. G on zales , 432 F. 3d 339, 344 ( 5t h C i r . 2005) ( “ [R ] eversali s i m proper u n l ess w e d eci de n oton l y t h at the evi den ce s u pp ort s a contrary c on cl u si on , bu tal so t h at t h e evi den ce compels i t”

. (i n t erna lqu ot ati on
m a rk s a n db ra ck e ts o m itted ) ( e m p h a sis inor igin a l))

. P et i t i on er w as not enti t l ed to reli ef based on hi s gi rl f

ri en d’ s abort i on b e c a u s e s u c h re lie f is lim ite dto s p o u s e s . S ee Zh a ngv . A sh cr oft , 395 F. 3d 531, 532 ( 5th C i r. 200 4)

. A dd i t i on al l y, concerni n g h i s possibl y bei n g ot h erw i se el i gibl e f

orr el i ef, t he under l yi ng c r edibi l i t y de t er m i nat i ons ar e s upport ed by
s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . S ee Zh ang v. G on zales , 432 F. 3d at343- 44.N o. 08- 60541

3 P eti ti on er’ s testi m on y, reg a rd i n g th e a ge h i s girl fri en dbe ca m e p reg n a n t, detai l s concerni n g h er aborti on , an d how an d w h en he obtai n ed d ocum en t s f i l ed i n s upp o r to f

hi s a ppli c at i on , w as e i t he r : i nt e r nall y i nc o ns i s t e nt ; i nc o ns i s t e nt
w i t h hi s w r i t t e n a ppli c at i o n; o ri nc o ns i s t e ntw i t h o t he re vi de nc e . I n s um , t he evi den ce d oes n otcom pela concl u si on t h at Peti t i on er’ s t est i m on y w as cr edibl e. S ee Mw em bi e v. G on zales , 4 43 F. 3d4 05 , 4 10 ( 5t h C i r . 200 6)

. Al o ng t hatl i ne , t he B IA ’ s h ol di n g P et i t i on er fai l ed to carry hi s burd en of est abli shi n g el i gibi l i t y f or asyl u m , w i t h h ol di n g o f d e p o rt ati on , or rel i ef un der t h e C A T , i s al so s u pp ort ed b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . S e eCh u n v . I NS , 4 0 F .3d 7 6 , 7 9 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 4 ). D E N IE D
.