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 pane 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 NA P OL E ON VI L L AC OR T E GA L AN G; 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- 74133 A ge nc yN os . A 077- 149- 639

A 079- 145- 348 A 098- 931- 022 A 098- 931- 023 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 ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M ay25, 2010 ** B e f o r e : C A N B Y , T H O M A S , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . N apol e on V i l l a c ort e G a l ang 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 the P hi l i pp i nes, pet i t i on for r evi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) di s m i s s a l of

a n i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s ( “ I J ” ) de c i s i on de ny i ng the i rappl i c a t i on f or w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al . W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2. W e r evi ew 

# FI LED JU N 03 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 74133 2 f o rs ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e f in d in g s o f

f a c t, Sh r es th a v . H

o lde r, 590 F . 3d 1034, 1039 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 0 ) a n dd e n o v o c la im s o f du e p r o c e s s v io la tio n s , Co lm e n a rv . I NS , 210 F .3 d9 6 7 , 9 7 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . W e de nyi n parta nd di s m i s s i n partthe pe t i t i on f or r e v ie w . G a lan g a d m itte dth a t h e e n te r e din to af r au du le n t m arr ia g e in o r d e rto o b ta in im m ig r a tio n b e n e f

its . I n lig h t o f

th is f r au d , an dG a lan g ’s f

a ilu r e to c o rr o b o r a te h is cl ai m thathe w as a gov ernm enti nform anti n the U ni t ed S t at es , 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 ilityf in d in g . Se e Shr es tha , 590 F . 3d a t1040- 44 ( a dve r s e c r e dibi l i tyde t e rm i na t i on w a s r e a s onabl e “ [ i ] n the t ot a l i tyof c ir c u m s tan c e s ” ) ; se e al

so A den v. H

older , 589 F . 3d 1040, 1046 ( 9th C i r . 2009) (“[t]h e h ig h ly d ef

er en ti al stan d ar do f r ev iew co m p els u s to let stan dth e B IA ’s det erm i nat i on thatpet i t i on er ’ s c orrobo rat i on w as i nsuffi ci ent . ”) . F i nal l y, w e r ej ec t G a l a ng’ s c ont e nt i on tha tthe I J ’ s a c t i ons dur i ng the m e r i t s he ar i ng de pr i ve d hi m of af u ll an df a irh e ar in g . La ta v . I

NS , 204 F . 3d 1241, 1246 ( 9th C i r . 2000) ( r e qui r i ng erro r a n dp re

ju d ice to p re v ail i n du e p ro ce ss claim ). A cc o rd in g ly G alan g ’s w i th h o l d i n g o f rem o v al cl ai m fai l s. W e l a c k j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w G a l ang’ s c ont e nt i ons r e gar di ng the de ni a l of h is a s y lu m c la im b e c au s e h e f a ile dto e x h au s t th e m b e f o r e th e B I A . See B arron v. A s h c r o ft , 3 5 8 F .3 d6 7 4 , 6 7 7 - 7 8 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D E N IE D i n p art; D IS M IS S E D i n p art.