FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 29 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HUA ZHANG, No. 06-75373
Petitioner, Agency No. A093-052-352
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Hua Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
*
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).
JK/Research
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Pal v. INS, 204 F.3d
935, 937 n.2 (9th Cir. 2000), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on discrepancies between Zhang’s testimony and documentary evidence
regarding when she was ordered to report for a pregnancy test, and Zhang’s failure
to provide a persuasive explanation for the discrepancy. See Goel v. Gonzales, 490
F.3d 735, 739 (9th Cir. 2007) (inconsistencies between testimony and documentary
evidence support an adverse credibility finding where inconsistencies go to the
heart of the claim). In the absence of credible testimony, Zhang’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
Because Zhang’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony the agency
found to be not credible, and Zhang points to no other evidence the agency should
have considered, her CAT claim fails. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
JK/Research 2 06-75373