Case Name: Sead KUCALOVIC; Azra Kucalovic; Lejla Kucalovic, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-17
Citations: 337 F. App'x 713
Docket Number: No. 08-70461
Parties: Sead KUCALOVIC; Azra Kucalovic; Lejla Kucalovic, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: O’SCANNLAIN, KLEINFELD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 337
Pages: 713–714

Head Matter:
Sead KUCALOVIC; Azra Kucalovic; Lejla Kucalovic, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 08-70461.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 8, 2009.
Filed July 17, 2009.
James F. Pleasants, Esquire, Bellevue, WA, Petitioners.
Francis William Fraser, I, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, Oil, Kate D. Balaban, Esquire, Leah V. Durant, Esquire, Susan K. Houser, Esquire, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-Distriet Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, KLEINFELD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The record does not compel the conclusion that Kucalovic testified credibly. See Malkandi v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 1029, 1040 (9th Cir.2008). Kucalovic did not disclose his sister, who has lived in Tuzla without any problems, nor his own residence in Tuzla, as reported by his daughter's birth certificate. Kucalovic's testimony regarding his parents conflicted with what they wrote. His returning to Bosnia after spending six months in the United States without applying for asylum, and remaining in Celic for nine months after allegedly finding mines on his property and receiving death threats, are facts supporting the adverse credibility decision. See Loho v. Mukasey, 581 F.3d 1016, 1018 (9th Cir.2008).
DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.