Opinion ID: 2674742
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: January 26, 2012 IJ Decision

Text: The IJ issued a written decision denying Bellorin Urdaneta’s claims for asylum and withholding of removal. The IJ made an adverse credibility determination and gave these reasons: First, the IJ found that (1) Bellorin Urdaneta provided no evidence to counter the FDL’s report and (2) it was implausible that Bellorin Urdaneta gave Branks original documents from Venezuela, as Bellorin Urdaneta testified, and then Branks somehow forged those same documents before placing them in a sealed envelope for Bellorin Urdaneta’s asylum interview. The IJ thus found inconsistencies between (1) the FDL’s report indicating Bellorin Urdaneta’s documents were false and (2) Bellorin Urdaneta’s testimony that she did not knowingly submit fraudulent documents. 10 Case: 13-13411 Date Filed: 05/16/2014 Page: 11 of 18 The IJ also found inconsistencies between Bellorin Urdaneta’s written statement and testimony because: (1) her written statement referred to the Bolivarian Circles as “Tupamaros” and “Chavistas,” but she did not use those same terms in her oral testimony; (2) her written statement provided that, on June 15, 2006, the Bolivarian Circles attacked her by throwing chemicals in her eyes, but she testified that this incident occurred on August 30, 2006; and (3) her written statement referenced her diagnosis with irritable bowel syndrome after the attempted rape by the Chavistas, but she omitted that fact in her testimony and instead testified that she was treated by a family doctor who prescribed pills to calm her down. The IJ further found that: (1) Bellorin Urdaneta’s testimony—that her bad relationship with her brother prevented her from obtaining his asylum approval notice—was inconsistent with the fact that she was able to obtain her brother’s documentary evidence regarding their father’s political activism; (2) the fact that Bellorin Urdaneta was able to freely travel from Venezuela and enter the United States on a B2 nonimmigrant visitor visa was inconsistent with her testimony that she was in all the database systems in Venezuela as an opponent of President Chavez; and (3) Bellorin Urdaneta’s testimony failed to explain how her attackers were able to consistently identify her over a span of four years, from 2003 to 2007, on so many different occasions. 11 Case: 13-13411 Date Filed: 05/16/2014 Page: 12 of 18 Because Bellorin Urdaneta lacked credibility, the IJ found that Bellorin Urdaneta failed to prove past persecution. Primarily due to Bellorin Urdaneta’s lack of credibility, the IJ found that Bellorin Urdaneta also failed to prove a wellfounded fear of future persecution. The IJ concluded that Bellorin Urdaneta failed to demonstrate entitlement to asylum or to withholding of removal. J. February 2012 BIA Appeal and July 2, 2013 Decision In February 2012, Bellorin Urdaneta appealed the IJ’s decision, on the grounds that the IJ erred in finding that: (1) Bellorin Urdaneta was not credible in her account of her 2003-2007 persecution in Venezuela, (2) Bellorin Urdaneta failed to prove past persecution, and (3) Bellorin Urdaneta failed to prove a wellfounded fear of future persecution. Bellorin Urdaneta also filed a copy of her brother’s asylum approval for the BIA’s consideration. Bellorin Urdaneta claimed that her mother obtained the approval notice from her brother on Bellorin Urdaneta’s behalf. On July 2, 2013, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision. The BIA determined that, based on the totality of the circumstances, there was no clear error in the IJ’s credibility finding. The BIA concluded that, in the absence of credible testimony or other evidence independently establishing Bellorin Urdaneta’s burden of proof, 12 Case: 13-13411 Date Filed: 05/16/2014 Page: 13 of 18 Bellorin Urdaneta failed to satisfy the burden of proof for asylum and withholding of removal.4