NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 11 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YONGXING LUO, No. 14-71234
Petitioner, Agency No. A099-967-721
v.
MEMORANDUM*
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 7, 2019**
Pasadena, California
Before: GILMAN,*** FISHER, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Yongxing Luo, a Chinese citizen, petitions for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ)
denial of his claim for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the
*
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).
***
The Honorable Ronald Lee Gilman, United States Circuit Judge for
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.
Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1),
and we deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ and BIA’s adverse credibility findings.
We review “findings of fact, including credibility findings, for substantial evidence
and must uphold the [IJ’s] and [the] BIA’s finding unless the evidence compels a
contrary result.” Almaghzar v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 915, 920 (9th Cir. 2006). Here,
the IJ found that Luo had fabricated his story of detention by the Chinese
authorities on account of his purported involvement in an underground Christian
church in China. Ample record evidence supports the IJ’s finding. Luo gave
inconsistent information about whether his sister or his mother first introduced him
to Christianity. He was also inconsistent about the location of his arrest, testifying
that he was arrested while attending a church meeting at Ding Kang’s home, but
stating in the declaration that he submitted with his application that he was arrested
at Brother Ruan’s home. Luo gave inconsistent testimony as to food and sleep
deprivation while detained and when he learned that his fellow church members
remained in detention. Finally, his testimony about the Chinese government’s
revocation of his business license was inconsistent with the text of the license, and
his testimony about his family’s residences contradicted his household registration
information.
PETITION DENIED.
2