11-4124
Tsering v. Holder
BIA
Christensen, IJ
A089 200 631
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
SUMMARY ORDER
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER
FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF
APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER
IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN
ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY
ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United
States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York,
on the 27th day of February, two thousand fourteen.
PRESENT:
JON O. NEWMAN,
REENA RAGGI,
CHRISTOPHER F. DRONEY,
Circuit Judges.
_____________________________________
WANGYAL TSERING, AKA MUKHIYA GHALE,
Petitioner,
v. 11-4124
NAC
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL.,
Respondents.
_____________________________________
FOR PETITIONER: Jason A. Nielson, Law Offices of
Thomas Mungoven, New York, New York.
FOR RESPONDENTS: Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant
Attorney General; Paul Fiorino,
Senior Litigation Counsel; Judith R.
O’Sullivan, Trial Attorney, Office
of Immigration Litigation, Civil
Division, United States Department
of Justice, Washington, D.C.
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a
Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is
DENIED.
Petitioner Wangyal Tsering seeks review of a September
20, 2011, order of the BIA affirming the February 10, 2011,
decision of Immigration Judge (“IJ”) Jesse B. Christensen
denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal,
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In
re Wangyal Tsering, No. A089 200 631 (B.I.A. Sep. 20, 2011),
aff’g No. A089 200 631 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Feb. 10, 2011).
We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts
and procedural history in this case.
Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed
the IJ’s decision as supplemented by the BIA’s decision. See
Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). The
applicable standards of review are well established. See 8
U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Yanqin Weng v. Holder, 562 F.3d 510,
513 (2d Cir. 2009).
In this case, the agency denied relief based on an
adverse credibility determination. For asylum applications
such as this one, governed by the REAL ID Act, the agency may,
2
considering the totality of the circumstances, base a
credibility finding on an asylum applicant’s “demeanor,
candor, or responsiveness,” and inconsistencies in his or her
statements, without regard to whether they go “to the heart of
the applicant’s claim.” 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii).
Tsering does not challenge the IJ’s findings regarding his
demeanor, discrepancies in his statements, and his failure to
mention human rights abuses in Tibet when asked what he feared
would happen to him if he were returned to China. Although
Tsering asserts that some of these findings do not support the
IJ’s credibility determination, because he does not point to
any error or offer any specific argument, the findings stand
as valid bases for the adverse credibility determination. See
Shunfu Li v. Mukasey, 529 F.3d 141, 146-47 (2d Cir. 2008).
Tsering does challenge the IJ’s finding that he failed to
establish his identity. However, that conclusion is supported
by the record. We defer to the IJ’s finding that Tsering’s
claim that he had forgotten the Tibetan language was
implausible because he testified that for the first 24 years
of his life, between 1974 and 1998, he lived in Tibet or a
Tibetan refugee camp. See Ming Xia Chen v. BIA, 435 F.3d 141,
145 (2d Cir. 2006) (noting that we will defer to an IJ’s
3
finding that an applicant’s testimony is inherently
implausible “unless we are left with the definite and firm
conviction that a mistake has been committed” (internal
quotation marks omitted)).
In light of his other concerns about Tsering’s
credibility, the IJ reasonably expected Tsering to provide
corroborating evidence to rehabilitate his testimony. See
Biao Yang v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 268, 273 (2d Cir. 2007). We
defer to the IJ’s permissible conclusion that Tsering’s
documents issued by the Tibet Office in New York did not
establish that he was from Tibet because those documents did
not come from Tibet or Nepal and the Tibet Office did not
independently verify Tsering’s identity. See Xiao Ji Chen v.
U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 471 F.3d 315, 342 (2d Cir. 2006)
(holding that the weight to be afforded to evidence “lies
largely within the discretion of the IJ” (internal quotation
marks and alteration omitted)). Similarly, we defer to the
IJ’s reasonable conclusion that the uncorroborated letters
from the Tibet Office and Tsering’s friends were entitled to
little weight, because they were unauthenticated, unsworn
statements of interested parties. See id.
4
Together, Tsering’s demeanor, the inconsistencies in his
testimony, his failure to note concerns about China’s
treatment of the Tibetan population, the implausibility of his
testimony that he had forgotten how to speak Tibetan, and his
inadequate corroborating evidence provide substantial evidence
in support of the agency’s credibility determination. See Xiu
Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162, 167 (2d Cir. 2008).
Accordingly, because Tsering’s claims that he would be
persecuted or tortured in Nepal or China depended on the
credibility of his testimony, the agency’s adverse credibility
determination forecloses all relief. See Paul v. Gonzales,
444 F.3d 148, 156 (2d Cir. 2006).
For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is
DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of removal
that the Court previously granted in this petition is VACATED,
and any pending motion for a stay of removal in this petition
is DISMISSED as moot.
FOR THE COURT:
Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
5