Case Name: Tamara Jora KIKOYAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-06-16
Citations: 134 F. App'x 193
Docket Number: No. 03-73015
Parties: Tamara Jora KIKOYAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: B. FLETCHER, RYMER, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 134
Pages: 193–194

Head Matter:
Tamara Jora KIKOYAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-73015.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted: June 8, 2005.
Decided: June 16, 2005.
Alan Aghabegian, Law Offices of Alan Aghabegian, Glendale, CA, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Margaret Perry, Esq., R. Lynne Harris, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: B. FLETCHER, RYMER, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Alberto R. Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Tamara Jora Kikoyan is a native and citizen of Armenia. She appeals a Board of Immigration Appeals decision denying her asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture.
Adverse credibility findings are reviewed under the deferential substantial evidence standard and will be upheld unless the evidence compels a contrary result. Melkonian v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 1061, 1065 (9th Cir.2003). In this case, the immigration judge's adverse credibility decision is amply supported by inconsistencies within Kikoyan's testimony and inconsistencies between her testimony and her asylum application. In particular, the immigration judge properly gave considerable weight to the fraudulent INS letter. In the absence of credible testimony there is no evidence in the record of past persecution, a well-founded fear of future persecution, or a fear of torture. Accordingly, the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals is affirmed.
PETITION DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.