FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 15 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
QINGYI REN, No. 11-73972
Petitioner, Agency No. A099-967-725
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 13, 2013**
San Francisco, California
Before: HAWKINS, THOMAS, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Petitioner Qingyi Ren (“Ren”), a native and citizen of China, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming the
Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) adverse credibility finding. We have jurisdiction under
*
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).
8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), and, because substantial evidence supports the IJ’s
decision, we affirm. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1087 (9th Cir. 2011).
Ren claims asylum and withholding of removal based on persecution in
connection with the Chinese government’s termination of his wife’s second
pregnancy and planned sterilization of Ren. Because the Attorney General has
rejected the per se rule that an applicant may qualify for asylum based solely on a
spouse’s forced abortion, see Matter of J-S-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 520, 537–38 (A.G.
2008), the IJ appropriately focused on Ren’s own fear of persecution.
The IJ articulated several legitimate bases to question Ren’s credibility and
offered specific and cogent reasons for her stated determination of lack of
credibility. Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir. 2007). Ren failed to
mention any threats of sterilization in his written statement in support of his
asylum application. “[O]missions of detail . . . regardless of whether they go to the
heart of a petitioner’s claim, may support an adverse credibility finding.” Tamang
v. Holder, 598 F.3d 1083, 1093 (9th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks omitted);
see also Kin v. Holder, 595 F.3d 1050, 1057 (9th Cir. 2010). Here, the asserted
threats of sterilization formed the crux of Ren’s asylum claim, and the IJ
reasonably could find implausible Ren’s explanation that he omitted this
information initially because he was nervous and did not consider the information
2
important. Additionally, the IJ reasonably concluded that Ren’s fears were not
credible, where Ren did not plausibly explain why he was targeted for sterilization
many years after his wife’s forced abortion. See Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d
1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2010) (plausibility may form the basis of an adverse
credibility determination). Substantial evidence therefore supports the agency’s
adverse credibility determination. See id. at 1046–47 (adverse credibility
determination reasonable under the totality of the circumstances).
PETITION DENIED.
3