Case Name: Aziz ZAVAHER, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-09-05
Citations: 73 F. App'x 758
Docket Number: No. 02-60659
Parties: Aziz ZAVAHER, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 73
Pages: 758–759

Head Matter:
Aziz ZAVAHER, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 02-60659.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 5, 2003.
Joshua Turin, Sondra Mae Turin, Turin & Turin, Dallas, TX, for Petitioner.
John Ashcroft, pro se, Patricia L. Buchanan, Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Carl Henry McIntyre, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Anne M. Estrada, US Immigration & Naturalization Service, Dallas, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, US Immigration & Naturalization Service, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.
Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Aziz Zavaher, a citizen of Iran, petitions for review of an order from the Board of Immigration Appeals' affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge's decision to deny his application for asylum and withholding of removal. Zavaher contends the BIA erred by upholding the IJ's credibility determinations and by failing to give weight to his own documentary evidence and corroborative testimony. The IJ determined that Zavaher failed to present a credible application for asylum after viewing Zavaher's demeanor and examining inconsistencies and implausibilities in Zavaher's testimony and application.
"We give great deference to an IJ's decisions concerning an alien's credibility." Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 903 (5th Cir.2002). In this regard, we have made it emphatically clear that we "will not review decisions turning purely on the immigration judge's assessment of the alien petitioner's credibility". Chun v. I.N.S., 40 F.3d 76, 78 (5th Cir.1994) (quotation omitted). Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the IJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence and the record does not "compel! ]" a contrary conclusion. Id.
DENIED
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.