FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 26 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHUXIANG SUI, No. 13-72579
Petitioner, Agency No. A088-292-620
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 20, 2016**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Shuxiang Sui, a native and citizen of China, petitions 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
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
*
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).
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 the record regarding Sui’s baptism in the United States,
her connection to a fellow Chinese national in the United States, and her level of
involvement in falsifying her nonimmigrant visa application in 2007. See id. at
1048 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under the “totality of
circumstances”). Sui’s explanations for these contradictions do not compel a
contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the
absence of credible testimony, Sui’s asylum and withholding of removal claims
fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Sui’s CAT claim
because it was based on the same evidence found not credible and the record does
not otherwise compel the finding that it is more likely than not Sui would be
tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to
China. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048-49.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 13-72579