Court Opinion

ID: 3066000
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-14 22:50:54.180919+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:38:22.345681
License: Public Domain

FILED
                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            DEC 02 2014

                                                                          MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JIANHUA WANG,                                    No. 12-72186

               Petitioner,                       Agency No. A088-093-782

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

               Respondent.

                      On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                          Board of Immigration Appeals

                             Submitted November 18, 2014**

Before:        LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

       Jianhua Wang, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture

          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
          **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial

evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse

credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590

F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

      Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination

based on the inconsistencies between Wang’s testimony and other record evidence

regarding the injuries he allegedly suffered during police detention, and the reason

he was dismissed from his job. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination

was reasonable under the REAL ID Act’s “totality of the circumstances” standard).

The agency reasonably rejected Wang’s explanations for the inconsistencies. See

Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir. 2007). We reject Wang’s

contention that the IJ mischaracterized his testimony. In the absence of credible

testimony, Wang’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v.

Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

      Finally, Wang does not raise any arguments in his opening brief regarding

the agency’s denial of his CAT claim. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256,

1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not supported by argument are deemed waived).

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

                                          2                                   12-72186