FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 30 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GUOMING ZHENG, No. 13-70072
Petitioner, Agency No. A089-884-573
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 22, 2014**
Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges
Guoming Zheng, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection 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, 1039-40 (9th
Cir. 2010).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on inconsistencies within Zheng’s testimony and between his testimony and
asylum application regarding the circumstances of his arrest and detention. See id.
at 1048 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under totality of
circumstances). Zheng’s explanations do not compel a contrary result. See Lata v.
INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). Further, Zheng does not challenge the
agency’s demeanor finding. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60
(9th Cir. 1996). In the absence of credible testimony, Zheng’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
Finally, Zheng’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same evidence
the agency found not credible, and he does not point to any other evidence in the
record that compels the finding that it is more likely than not he would be tortured
by or with the acquiescence of the government if returned to China. See id. at
1156-57.
2 13-70072
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 13-70072