FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
NOV 09 2015
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LIZHEN ZHANG, No. 13-70115
Petitioner, B.I.A. No. A099-736-635
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 5, 2015**
Pasadena, California
Before: GRABER and GOULD, Circuit Judges, and DANIEL,*** Senior District
Judge.
Petitioner Lizhen Zhang seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
("BIA") denial of her claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
***
The Honorable Wiley Y. Daniel, Senior United States District Judge for
the District of Colorado, sitting by designation.
the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). For the reasons stated below, we deny
the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the immigration judge’s ("IJ") adverse
credibility finding, which the BIA affirmed. See Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079,
1084–85 (9th Cir. 2011) (explaining the standard of review under the REAL ID
Act). The BIA permissibly found Petitioner incredible given that Petitioner was
inconsistent in her testimony regarding whether and when she had an intrauterine
device inserted. Moreover, Petitioner failed to present specific documentary
evidence that independently established her claims. See Al-Harbi v. INS, 242 F.3d
882, 891 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding that "documentary evidence pertaining to the
asylum applicant himself and to the events in which he was involved . . . can
independently establish facts essential to . . . an asylum claim"). The BIA,
therefore, properly denied Petitioner’s claims for asylum, withholding of removal,
and CAT relief.
Petition DENIED.
2