Court Opinion

ID: 4222697
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-11-21 22:00:36.874265+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:50.956066
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       NOV 21 2017
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LIANY ADLIM,                                    No. 15-73878

                Petitioner,                     Agency No. A089-884-196

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,

                Respondent.

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

                          Submitted November 15, 2017**

Before:      CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

      Liany Adlim, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration

judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and

protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
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 inconsistencies between Adlim’s testimony and documentary evidence as

to the incident in February 2008, and as to her father’s birthplace. See id. at 1048

(adverse credibility finding reasonable under the totality of the circumstances).

Adlim’s explanations for the inconsistencies do not compel a contrary result. See

Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible

testimony, in this case, Adlim’s asylum and withholding of removal claims

fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

      Adlim’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same testimony the

agency found not credible, and Adlim does not point to any evidence that compels

the finding it is more likely than not she would be tortured by or with the

consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Indonesia. See id. at

1156-57.

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

                                          2                                    15-73878