NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 21 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
XIN ZHAO, No. 15-73493
Petitioner, Agency No. A089-883-877
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2016**
Before: HAWKINS, N.R. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judge.
Xin Zhao, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se 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
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We review for
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
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 finding based
on an inconsistency as to Zhao’s alleged mistreatment in China. See id. at 1048
(adverse credibility finding reasonable under the totality of the circumstances).
Zhao’s explanations do not compel a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204
F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible testimony, Zhao’s
asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d
1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Finally, Zhao’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same testimony
the agency found not credible, and the record does not compel the conclusion that
it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or
acquiescence of a public official in China. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 15-73493