UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C U IT
C OR ALIA DEL C ARM EN C OR NEJO, Pe t i tione r,
v. R OB ER T M . W ILKINSON, Ac ting Attorney

Ge ne ra l, R e sponde nt. No. 19-72929 Age n c y No. A216-166-778
ORDER

B e fore : GR

AB E R , C LIFTON, a

nd IKUTA, C irc uit Judge s. The m e m orandum

disposition file d Nove m

be r 3, 2020 (Doc ke t Entry No. 34), is a

m e nde d a s follows: 1. On pa ge 1, upda

te c a ption: Re pla c e “ W illia

m P. B arr, Attorne y

Ge ne ra l” with “ R obe rt M
. W ilkinson, Ac ting Attorney Ge ne ra l” 2. On pa ge 2, first pa

ra gra ph, line1: R e m ove “ at

le a st one ba sis for.” Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports a

t le a st one ba sis for the IJ’ s a dve rse c re dibility

de te rm inat ion. with Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the IJ’ s a dve rse c re d ibility

de te rm ination. 3. On pa ge 2, first pa

ra gra ph, se c o nd se nte n c e : R e m ove se c ond pa re nthe tic a l. 

# FIL ED MAR 3 2021 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALSSe e Lizhi Qiu v . Barr , 944 F.3d 837, 842 (9th C ir. 2019) (holding tha t we m ust uphold a

n a d v e rse c re dibility

finding if substa

ntia l e vide nc e supports e ve n o n e ground re lie d upon). with Se eLizhi Qiu v . Barr , 944 F.3d 837, 842 (9th C ir. 2019). W ith thefore going a

m e ndm e nts to them e m orandum disposition, Pe titione r’ s Pe t ition for Re he a ring En B anc (Doc ke t Entry No. 35) is DENIED. No furthe r pe titions for re he aring will be a c c e pte d in this c a se .

2N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
C OR ALIA DEL C ARM EN C OR NEJO, Pe t i tione r,
v. R OB ER T M . W ILKINSON, Ac ting Attorney

Ge ne ra l, R e sponde nt. No. 19-72929 Age n c y No. A216-166-778 AM ENDED M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Argue d a nd Subm itte d Oc tobe r 26, 2020 Portla nd, Ore gon B e fore : GR

AB E R , C LIFTON, a

nd IKUTA, C irc uit Judge s. C ora lia D e l C arm e n C orne jo pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m i gration Appe a l s ’ (“ B IA” ) de c ision a ffirm i ng the im m igration judge ’ s (“ IJ” ) de nia l of a sy lum

and withholding of re

m ova l . W e de ny

the pe tition. 

# FIL ED MAR 3 2021 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the IJ’ s a dve rse c re d ibility

de te rm ination. Se e Lizhi Qiu v . Barr , 944 F.3d 837, 842 (9th C ir. 2019). C orne jo’ s te stim ony

wa s inc o nsiste nt with de c l arations subm itte d by he r m othe r and brothe r. Se eK ohli v

. Gonzale s , 473 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th C ir. 2007) (c onc luding tha t disc re p anc ie s be twe e n pe titione r’ s te stim ony , de c la ration, a nd le tte r of m e m

be rship substa

ntia lly supporte d a

n a dve rse c re dibility

finding). Theinc onsiste n c y is not trivia

l : whe the r
and whe n C orne

jo a nd he r m othe r fle d the ir hom e re late s dire c t ly to the thre ats by ga ng m e m be rs. Se eC

he bc houb v . IN

S , 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th C ir. 2001) (holding tha

t inc o nsiste nc ie s re lating to “the e ve nts le a ding up to [pe titione r’ s] de pa rture and the num

be r of tim e s he wa s arre ste d” substa ntia te d a n a dve rse
c re d ibility

de te rm inat ion), supe rse de d by statute on othe r grounds as state d in Shre stha v . Holde r , 590 F.3d 1034, 1046 (9th C ir. 2010). Abse nt c re dible te stim ony , C orne

jo’ s a sy lum

an d withholding c la im s fa il. Se eFarah v . Ashc roft , 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th C ir. 2003). W e ne e d not re a c h C orne jo’ s othe r
argum e nts. PE T IT IO N DE NIE D.

2