FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 03 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JORGE A. CASTILLO, No. 11-73339
Petitioner, Agency No. A094-826-424
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 17, 2013**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Jorge A. Castillo, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions 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 relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
*
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).
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 (9th Cir. 2010). We review de novo claims of due process violations.
Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny the petition for
review.
The IJ’s adverse credibility determination was based on the totality of the
circumstances, including a finding that Castillo’s testimony was inconsistent
regarding his assertion that he is a political person and would be killed for his
political activity if he returned to El Salvador, and his admission that he did not
engage in any political activity while he was in El Salvador between 1997 and
2003. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under the
REAL ID Act’s “totality of the circumstances” standard). Castillo’s explanations
do not compel a contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.
2000). In the absence of credible testimony, Castillo’s asylum and withholding of
removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Because Castillo’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony the agency
found not credible, and the record does not otherwise compel the conclusion it is
more likely than not that he will be tortured if returned to El Salvador, the CAT
2 11-73339
claim also fails. See id. at 1156-57. We reject Castillo’s contention that the
agency’s analysis of his CAT claim was insufficient.
We reject Castillo’s contention that the agency violated due process by
failing to consider all of the evidence. See Lata, 204 F.3d at 1246 (requiring error
and prejudice to prevail on a due process challenge).
Finally, in light of our credibility conclusion, we need not reach Castillo’s
arguments regarding the timeliness of his asylum application.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 11-73339