FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 01 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JIAJIE LUO, No. 08-70519
Petitioner, Agency No. A097-369-438
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Jiajie Luo, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his applications for asylum and withholding of
removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo
*
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).
questions of law and for substantial evidence factual findings. Husyev v. Mukasey,
528 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility finding based
on the inconsistency between Luo’s original and subsequent accounts of the factual
basis for his claim, see Husyev, 528 F.3d at 1183 (omission of petitioner’s political
activism in his application and interview went to the heart of his claim), and based
on the implausible account of the omission of his father’s flight from China in his
original application, see Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 963-64 (9th Cir. 2004)
(adverse credibility finding supported where petitioner omitted wife’s forced
sterilization from prior accounts and immigration judge addressed proffered
explanation for omission). We also reject Luo’s contention that the agency erred
by failing to consider two corroborating documents because the IJ stated that she
examined the documentary evidence, and Luo has not overcome the presumption
that the agency reviewed the record. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592,
603 (9th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, in the absence of credible testimony, we deny
the petition as to Luo’s asylum and withholding of removal claims.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-70519