UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-2371
WILLIAM ALEXANDER CASTILLO-BENAVIDES,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: June 29, 2016 Decided: July 6, 2016
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Alexander Castillo-Benavides, Petitioner Pro Se. Scott
Michael Marconda, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William Alexander Castillo-Benavides petitions for review of
an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing
his appeal from the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his requests
for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
Convention Against Torture.
On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the
petitioner’s informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Here, the
Board affirmed the IJ’s denial of asylum and withholding of removal
on the ground that Castillo-Benavides lacked credibility. In his
informal brief, however, Castillo-Benavides fails to challenge the
adverse credibility determination or the agency’s denial of his
request for protection under the Convention Against Torture. In
failing to challenge the basis for the agency’s denial of relief,
Castillo-Benavides has forfeited appellate review of the Board’s
order. See Suarez-Valenzuela v. Holder, 714 F.3d 241, 248-49 (4th
Cir. 2013) (deeming issues not raised in opening brief waived);
Niang v. Gonzales, 492 F.3d 505, 510 n.5 (4th Cir. 2007) (same).
Even if the issue was not forfeited, however, substantial
evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination, and
the IJ provided “specific, cogent reasons” for rejecting Castillo-
Benavides’ claims. See Ilunga v. Holder, 777 F.3d 199, 206-07
(4th Cir. 2015) (explaining credibility determinations). The
independent evidence that Castillo-Benavides submitted with his
2
asylum application contradicted his own version of events and
therefore does not overcome the adverse credibility determination.
See id. at 213.
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. In re Castillo-
Benavides (B.I.A. Oct. 5, 2015). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3