FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 14 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MOHAMED HUSSAIN MOHAMED No. 13-70944
RAFFI,
Agency No. A088-107-439
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 9, 2015**
Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Mohamed Hussain Mohamed Raffi, a native and citizen of Sri Lanka,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
*
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).
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility
determinations created by the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034,
1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on inconsistencies in Raffi’s testimony regarding the addresses of his
business and home and the omission from his declaration that he was beaten when
he was detained in 1995. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination was
reasonable under the “totality of circumstances”); see also Zamanov v. Holder, 649
F.3d 969, 973-74 (9th Cir. 2011) (upholding adverse credibility finding based on
inconsistencies and omission). The agency reasonably rejected Raffi’s
explanations. See Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir. 2007). In the
absence of credible testimony, Raffi’s asylum and withholding of removal claims
fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Raffi’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same statements the
agency found not credible and he does not point to any other evidence showing it is
more likely than not he will be tortured if returned to Sri Lanka. See id. at
1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 13-70944