FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 20 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHUNYU HU, No. 11-70125
Petitioner, Agency No. A088-112-410
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 14, 2013 **
Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA Circuit Judges.
Chunyu Hu, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
*
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).
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
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), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility determination
based on an omission from his written application of any mention that police were
looking for him at his home, and on the IJ’s negative assessment of Hu’s
demeanor. See Zamanov v. Holder, 649 F.3d 969, 973-74 (9th Cir. 2011)
(omission cast doubt on petitioner’s credibility); Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d
1147, 1151 (9th Cir. 1999) (“special deference” given to credibility determinations
based on demeanor). Accordingly, in the absence of credible testimony, Hu’s
asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d
1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Because Hu’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony found not credible
and he does not point to any evidence that shows it is more likely than not he will
face torture if returned to China, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 11-70125