# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 60634 Summary Calendar

**Ana Maria Castaneda**

**- Alvarez,** 

Petitioner **,**

versus **Merrick Garland,** U.S. Attorney General **,** Respondent

**.**

Petition for Review of an Order of t he Board of Immigration Appeals No. A 202 144 107

Before **King, Smith,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *
Ana Castaneda

- Alvarez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( “ BIA ” ) . She

a ver s that the BIA erred in affirming a decision of the immigration judge ( “IJ”), who made adverse credibility determination s and deni ed her applica

-

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opin

ion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 13, 2021 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-60634 Document: 00515860997 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2021No. 20

- 60634

2 tions for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture ( “ CAT ” ). We review only the BIA’s decision “unless the IJ’s decision has some impact on the BIA’s decision.” Wang v. Holder , 569 F.3d 531, 536 (5th Cir. 2009). Cred ibility determinations and determinations that an alien is not eli

gible for asylum, withholding of removal, or relief under the CAT are fac tual findings that are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. Avelar

Oliva v. Barr , 954 F.3d 757, 763 ( 5th Cir. 2020); Chen v. Gonzales , 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006); Eduard v. Ashcroft , 379 F.3d 182, 187 (5th Cir. 2004). Under the substantial evidence standard, we may not reverse the BIA’s factual findings unless “the evidence was so compelling tha t no rea

son a ble factfinder could conclude against it.” Wang , 569 F.3d at 537

. Castaneda

- Alvarez argues that the adverse credibility finding was in error because the internal inconsistencies within her testimony , and the incon sistencies among her te stimony, prior statements, and documents sub

mitted in support of her application , were immaterial to the heart of her testi

mony
. T he IJ , however, was permitted to rely on any inconsistency to deter

mine Castaneda

- Alvarez’s credibility , see Avelar

- Oliva , 954 F.3d at 768 , and the determination was supported by specific reasons based on the evidence presented and was, under the totality of the circumstances, substantially reasonable. See Wang , 569 F.3d at 538

- 39

. Because the adverse credibility determi nation was supported by “specific and cogent reasons,” the record does not compel a finding that Castaneda

- Alvarez was credible. See Zhang v. Gonzales , 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005 ). Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that the lack of credible evidence precludes Castaneda

- Alvarez from meeting h er burden of proof for asylum, with holding of removal, or relief under the CAT , and we need not address any alternative reasons for denying her claims. S ee Case: 20-60634 Document: 00515860997 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2021No. 20

- 60634

3 Suate

- Orellana v. Barr , 979 F.3d 1 056, 1061 (5th Cir. 2020 ); Dayo v. Holder , 687 F.3d 653, 658

− 59 (5th Cir. 2012) ; Chun v. INS , 40 F.3d 76, 79 (5th Cir. 1994)

. Accordingly, the petition for review is **DENIED**

**.** Case: 20-60634 Document: 00515860997 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/13/2021