UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NEGASI TEWELDE-DESTA,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-70489

Agency No. A088-346-796

ORDER

Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

The memorandum disposition filed on September 17, 2012, is withdrawn. 

An amended memorandum disposition is being filed concurrently with this order.

With this amendment, respondent’s petition for panel rehearing is denied.

No further petitions for rehearing will be entertained in this closed case.

FILED

JAN 22 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NEGASI TEWELDE-DESTA,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-70489

Agency No. A088-346-796

AMENDED MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 10, 2012** 

Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Negasi Tewelde-Desta, a native and citizen of Eritrea, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have

FILED

JAN 22 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-70489

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

agency’s factual findings, applying the new standards governing adverse

credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590

F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010), and we grant the petition for review and we

remand. 

The agency denied Tewelde-Desta’s claims based on an adverse credibility

determination. Substantial evidence does not support the agency’s non-responsive

demeanor finding because the record shows that Tewelde-Desta answered the

questions he was asked during cross-examination. See Garrovillas v. INS, 156

F.3d 1010, 1014-15 (9th Cir. 1998). Substantial evidence does not support the

agency’s finding that Tewelde-Destas’ testimony and corroborating evidence were

inconsistent regarding when he completed his military service. See Shrestha, 590

F.3d at 1044 (“[U]nder the REAL ID Act, IJs must provide specific and cogent

reasons in support of an adverse credibility determination.” ) (internal quotation

marks omitted). In addition, Tewelde-Desta’s statement that he received his

national service certificate in April 2007 appears to be an “innocent mistake.” See

Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1087 (9th Cir. 2011). Finally, the agency’s finding

that Tewelde-Desta gave inconsistent descriptions of the container in which he was

detained is not supported because it is based on a mischaracterization of his
3 10-70489

testimony. See id. at 1086; Tekle v. Mukasey, 533 F.3d 1044, 1052 (9th Cir. 2008). 

Accordingly, substantial evidence does not support the agency’s adverse credibility

determination. See Ren, 648 F.3d at 1089. 

We grant the petition for review and remand to the agency to determine in

the first instance whether, accepting Tewelde-Desta’s testimony as true, he is

eligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT relief. See INS v. Ventura,

537 U.S. 12, 16 (2002) (per curiam).

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.