FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 17 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALIAKSANDR KRASANTOVICH; No. 12-70026
LIUBOV VYACHESLAVOVNA
AKULINTSEVA, a.k.a. Leobov Agency Nos. A088-534-519
Vioachislavovna, A088-534-520
Petitioners,
MEMORANDUM*
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 10, 2014**
Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Aliaksandr Krasantovich, a native and citizen of Belarus, and Liubov
Vyacheslavovna Akulintseva, a native and citizen of Russia, petition for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an
*
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).
immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 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 grant the petition for review and remand.
The agency found Krasantovich not credible based on a perceived lack of
candor in his testimony and discrepancies between his testimony and his visa
application. These findings are not supported by substantial evidence. See Ren v.
Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1087 (9th Cir. 2011) (inconsistencies had no basis in the
record). The agency also found Krasantovich failed to corroborate his testimony.
However, at the time it made this finding, it did not have the benefit of our decision
in Ren, 648 F.3d at 1089-94. Accordingly, we grant the petition for review, and
remand Krasantovich’s claims, on an open record, for further proceedings
consistent with this disposition. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002)
(per curiam); Soto-Olarte v. Holder, 555 F.3d 1089, 1093-96 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
2 12-70026