Opinion ID: 49894
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Rest of the Evidence

Text: Tavera Lara also argues that the IJ failed properly to consider all the evidence she submitted. When the applicant offers “other evidence of persecution, whatever form it may take, the IJ must consider that evidence, and it is not sufficient to rely solely on an adverse credibility determination in those instances.” Forgue, 401 F.3d at 1287. Contrary to Tavera Lara’s assertion, the IJ denied her claims explicitly based on a review of “the totality of the exhibits and the documents tendered.” AR at 86. Even if, based upon the background evidence, the IJ found that Tavera Lara could interview. AR at 165-69, 236-47. 23 establish the objective aspect of a well-founded fear of future persecution, the adverse credibility determination regarding the subjective component precludes relief. Tavera Lara also complains that she has proven past persecution, which gives rise to a presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution. First, the IJ’s finding that Tavera Lara failed to establish past persecution is supported by substantial evidence in the record. The record evidence corroborated only Tavera Lara’s claims of receiving written and telephonic threats. However, these harassing or threatening calls and notes “do not rise to the level of past persecution that would compel reversal of the IJ’s decision.” See Sepulveda, 401 F.3d at 1231. Second, even if she had proven past persecution, Tavera Lara still cannot meet the subjective prong of the well-founded fear standard. In sum, regardless of the evidence of discrimination and violence against certain groups of homosexuals in Colombia, the record does not compel reversal of the IJ’s finding that Tavera Lara fails to meet the subjective fear of harm requirement for asylum.