FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 03 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HERVE GUY NGOUYOMBO, No. 13-73873
Petitioner, Agency No. A070-460-027
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 25, 2015**
Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Herve Guy Ngouyombo, a native and citizen of the Central African
Republic, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
(“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision
*
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).
denying his applications for withholding of removal and protection 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.
Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1047-48 (9th Cir. 2010). We review de novo
constitutional claims. Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1011 (9th Cir. 2010). We
deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility
determination, including the inconsistency between Ngouyombo’s testimony that
he had a good relationship with alleged family members who could have provided
corroborating evidence and his failure to submit any evidence to corroborate his
claim that he was related to a politically active family in the Central African
Republic, his unfamiliarity with his alleged brother’s political activities and his
attempt to read from documents when asked to provide testimony about those
activities, and his implausible testimony that he would be targeted for persecution
despite regime change. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048 (adverse credibility finding
was reasonable under totality of circumstances). Ngouyombo’s explanations for
his inconsistent and implausible testimony do not compel a contrary conclusion.
See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000).
2 13-73873
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of withholding of
removal, where Ngouyombo’s claim was premised on fear of being targeting due
to political activities of his alleged brother and cousin, but Ngouyombo’s
testimony was not credible and he provided no corroborating evidence before the
agency that he was related to such individuals. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1047
(“Under the REAL ID Act, [the court] may not reverse the IJ’s and BIA’s
conclusion that [the petitioner] should have been able to obtain [corroborating
evidence] . . . unless ‘a reasonable trier of fact is compelled to conclude that such
corroborating evidence is unavailable.’” (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4))).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief, where
Ngouyombo failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with
the consent or acquiescence of the government if removed to the Central African
Republic. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008).
To the extent Ngouyombo requests that this court take judicial notice of new
documents, which were not presented to the agency and which he contends
corroborate his claim to a familiar relationship to his alleged brother, that request is
denied. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A) (the court’s review is limited to the
administrative record); Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 963 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc)
3 13-73873
(new evidence may be added to the record through a motion to reopen with the
agency).
The record does not support Ngouyombo’s contentions that the Department
of Homeland Security withheld documents from him or that the IJ acted in a biased
manner.
Ngouyombo’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
4 13-73873