FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 25 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GRISELDA BEATRIZ CLAUDIO-ALAS, No. 10-70186
Petitioner, Agency No. A098-965-182
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 17, 2015**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Griselda Beatriz Claudio-Alas, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
*
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).
(“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, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We review de novo claims of due process
violations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004), and for abuse
of discretion the denial of a request for a continuance, Ahmed v. Holder, 569 F.3d
1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on inconsistencies between Claudio-Alas’s testimony and her asylum
application regarding her residence, employment, and schooling. See Shrestha,
590 F.3d at 1048 (adverse credibility finding reasonable under the totality of
circumstances). Claudio-Alas’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, Claudio-Alas’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See
Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Claudio-Alas’s
CAT claim because it is based on the same testimony found not credible, and she
does not point to any other evidence that compels the finding that it is more likely
than not she would be tortured if returned to El Salvador. See id. at 1156-57.
2 10-70186
Finally, the IJ did not abuse her discretion or violate due process in denying
Claudio-Alas’s motion for a second continuance. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29;
Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1247 (9th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (no
abuse of discretion in denying continuance where relief was not immediately
available); Lata, 204 F.3d at 1246 (requiring error and prejudice to prevail on a due
process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 10-70186