FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 29 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YONG WANG, No. 13-70285
Petitioner, Agency No. A087-721-686
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 21, 2015**
Before: CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Yong Wang, 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 protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
*
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).
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,
1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We grant the petition for review and remand.
Substantial evidence does not support the agency’s adverse credibility
finding based on Wang’s lack of familiarity with Christmas. See Ren v. Holder,
648 F.3d 1079, 1088-89 (9th Cir. 2011); see also Tekle v. Mukasey, 533 F.3d 1044,
1052-55 (9th Cir. 2008) (IJ mischaracterized the evidence). Further, substantial
evidence does not support the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on
the perceived inconsistencies regarding Sister Huo, and why Wang could not
operate his business, see Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1044 (“under the REAL ID Act, IJs
must provide specific and cogent reasons in support of an adverse credibility
determination”) (internal quotations omitted), nor does it support the agency’s
finding based on the inconsistency regarding the purpose of Wang’s trip to
Indonesia, see Ren, 648 F.3d at 1086 (“to support an adverse credibility
determination, an inconsistency must not be trivial and must have some bearing on
the petitioner’s veracity”) (citation omitted).
Thus, we grant the petition for review as to Wang’s asylum, withholding of
removal, and CAT claims, and we remand this case to the BIA, on an open record,
2 13-70285
for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. See INS v. Ventura, 537
U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam); see also Soto-Olarte v. Holder, 555 F.3d 1089,
1095 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
3 13-70285