FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KHACHIK TSATURYAN, No. 06-72225
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-175-560
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Khachik Tsaturyan, a native of Iran and citizen of Armenia, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from
an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding
*
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).
JT/Research
of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence and will
uphold the agency’s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.
Tekle v. Mukasey, 533 F.3d 1044, 1051 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
because Tsaturyan’s asylum application omits that he was persecuted on account of
his ethnicity, nationality, and political opinion, see Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959,
962 (9th Cir. 2004) (omission of matters that go to the heart of the claim from
asylum application support an adverse credibility determination), and because
Tsaturyan’s testimony was inconsistent with witness affidavits regarding the
burning of his gas station, the number of times he was beaten, whether he was
hospitalized, and the extent of the injuries he allegedly suffered, see Pal v. INS,
204 F.3d 935, 940 (9th Cir. 2000) (inconsistencies between testimony and
documentary evidence support an adverse credibility determination). Accordingly,
Tsaturyan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft,
348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
JT/Research 2 06-72225
Tsaturyan has failed to set forth any substantive argument regarding the
agency’s denial of CAT relief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256,
1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not supported by argument are deemed waived).
Tsaturyan’s request that the case be remanded to the BIA or held in
abeyance is denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
JT/Research 3 06-72225