FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 25 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LONGRI NAN, No. 11-73334
Petitioner, Agency No. A099-440-176
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 19, 2013**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Longri Nan, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal,
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
*
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).
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 (9th Cir.
2010). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility determination,
based on Nan’s inconsistent and admittedly dishonest statements regarding his
place of birth and elementary school, the discrepancy between his testimony and
supporting documentation regarding when he moved, and his failure to provide
corroborating evidence of his employment requested by the IJ. See id. at 1043-44;
Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1093-94 (9th Cir. 2011). The agency was not
compelled to accept Nan’s explanations for these inconsistencies. See Zamanov v.
Holder, 649 F.3d 969, 974 (9th Cir. 2011). In the absence of credible testimony,
Nan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348
F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Because Nan’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony the BIA found
not credible, and the record does not otherwise compel the conclusion that it is
more likely than not that he will be tortured if returned to China, his CAT claim
also fails. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 11-73334