Opinion ID: 3038494
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Poghosyan’s Asylum Claim

Text: The Attorney General has the discretion to grant asylum to an alien who meets the definition of a “refugee.” 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b). An individual qualifies as a “refugee” if he is “unable or unwilling” to return to her country of origin “because of persecution or a wellfounded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” Id. at § 1101(a)(42). To establish eligibility for asylum, an alien must demonstrate past persecution by substantial evidence or a wellfounded fear of persecution that is both subjectively and objectively reasonable. Butt v. Gonzales, 429 F.3d 430, 433 (3d Cir. 2005). An alien seeking asylum “ha[s] the burden of supporting [his] asylum claim[] through credible testimony.” Gao, 299 F.3d at 272. In some cases, the alien may be required to provide documentary evidence to meet his burden of proof. Id. 5 We are satisfied that the adverse credibility determination in this case, which was affirmed by the BIA, was supported by substantial evidence. We have set out this evidence above. Moreover, in light of the shortcomings in Poghosyan’s case, the IJ did not err in questioning the lack of corroboration for Poghosyan’s claims. B. Poghosyan’s Withholding of Removal and Convention Against Torture Claims Poghosyan’s claims for withholding of removal and withholding under the Convention Against Torture are based on the same evidence as his asylum claim. Our conclusion that the adverse credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence applies with equal force to his withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture claims.