FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 05 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ZHENSHUI DUAN, No. 09-72233
Petitioner, Agency No. A099-049-995
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 21, 2012 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Zhenshui Duan, 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 have
*
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).
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings, applying the new standards governing adverse
credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590
F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility finding
based on Duan’s evasive, inconsistent account of his knowledge of illicit activities;
his inconsistent account of reporting a beating; his inability to provide a consistent,
coherent explanation of the hotel’s finances and his ability to make payments; and
the agency’s negative assessment of his demeanor. See id. at 1045-48 (adverse
credibility determination was reasonable under the REAL ID Act’s “totality of
circumstances”); Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1151 (9th Cir. 1999) (special
deference given to credibility determinations that are based on demeanor). In the
absence of credible testimony, Duan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims
fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Because Duan’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony found to be not
credible, and he does not point to any evidence that shows it is more likely than not
that he will be tortured if returned to China, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at
1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-72233