FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 17 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LICHUN SONG, No. 13-71001
Petitioner, Agency No. A099-421-430
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
March 10, 2015**
Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Lichun Song, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s
order of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, and review de novo questions of
*
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).
law. Kulakchyan v. Holder, 730 F.3d 993, 995 (9th Cir. 2013). We deny in part
and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Song conceded that she knowingly filed a false claim for asylum, and
substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Song received
adequate notice of the consequences of filing a frivolous application and thus
knowingly filed a frivolous application for asylum. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(d)(4)(A),
(6). The record shows that Song’s asylum interview was monitored by an
interpreter to ensure there were no mistranslations, and during her asylum
interview Song signed the Record of Applicant’s Oath During an Interview
swearing that she was advised of the consequences of filing a frivolous application
by the interpreter and she signed her asylum application. See Kulakchyan, 730
F.3d at 995; Cheema v. Holder, 693 F.3d 1045, 1049 (9th Cir. 2012) (“written
warning on the asylum application adequately notifies the applicant of . . . the
consequences of knowingly filing a frivolous asylum application.”).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s adverse credibility
determination based on Song’s history of misrepresentations before United States
government officials, as well as her inability to reconcile the discrepancies in the
record regarding her marital history. See Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039,
1044 (9th Cir. 2010).
2 13-71001
Song did not raise, and has therefore waived, any challenge to the
agency’s withholding of removal determination. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d
1083, 1091 n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) (issues not raised in opening brief are waived).
We lack jurisdiction to review Song’s unexhausted contentions regarding the
agency’s reliance on her misrepresentations to the consulate in China; the
reliability of the oath signed at the asylum office; the lack of procedural safeguards
at the asylum office; and her lack of opportunity to cross-examine the interpreter
who monitored the asylum interview. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678
(9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED IN PART.
3 13-71001