An hui He v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-60115 Affirmed ] Judge: CDK , Judge: FPB , Judge: JWE Mandate pull date is 02/07/2011 [10-60115]

An hui He v. Eric Holder, e: 10-60115 Cas Jr.

Document: 00511324780 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2010

Doc. 0

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 10-60115 S u m m a r y Calendar December 17, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

A N HUI HE, P e titio n e r v. E R I C H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, R espon dent

P e tit io n for Review of an Order of the B o a r d of Immigration Appeals B I A No. A094 927 846

B e fo r e KING, BENAVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* A n Hui He, a native and citizen of China, applied for asylum, withholding o f removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) alleging p e r s e c u t io n on account of his Christian faith and his violation of China's family p la n n in g policy. His application was denied based on an adverse credibility fin d in g by the immigration judge (IJ), which was upheld by the Board of I m m ig r a t io n Appeals (BIA) when it dismissed He's administrative appeal.

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

*

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-60115 Document: 00511324780 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2010 No. 10-60115 H e asserts that the IJ and BIA erred in determining that his persecution c la im was not credible. He attempts to explain why each of the discrepancies, o m is s io n s , and implausibilities relied upon by the immigration court should not h a v e resulted in an adverse credibility finding. He does not address the IJ's fin d in g that his demeanor during the hearing indicated that his testimony was n o t credible. W e review the factual findings of an immigration court for substantial e v id e n c e . Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 594 (5th Cir. 2007). "Under this s t a n d a r d , reversal is improper unless we decide not only that the evidence s u p p o r t s a contrary conclusion, but [also] that the evidence compels it." Zhang v . Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and c it a t io n omitted). Among the findings of fact that we review for substantial e v id e n c e is the conclusion that an alien is not eligible for asylum, withholding o f removal, or relief under the CAT. Id. Pursuant to the REAL ID Act of 2005, "an IJ may rely on any in con sisten cy or omission in making an adverse credibility determination as long a s the totality of the circumstances establishes that an asylum applicant is not c r e d ib le ." Wang, 569 F.3d at 538 (internal quotation marks and citation

o m it t e d ); see also 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii). We will "defer therefore to an IJ's c r e d ib ilit y determination unless, from the totality of the circumstances, it is p la in that no reasonable fact-finder could make such an adverse credibility r u lin g ." Wang, 569 F.3d at 538 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The adverse credibility finding here is supported by substantial evidence. There were inconsistencies, omissions, and implausibilities throughout He's in it ia l asylum interview, his asylum application, the supporting documentation, a n d his testimony concerning the alleged persecution of his family. He has not d e m o n s t r a t e d that "it is plain that no reasonable fact-finder could make . . . an a d v e r s e credibility ruling." Wang, 569 F.3d at 538 (internal quotation marks a n d citation omitted). Accordingly, we defer to the findings of the BIA and the 2

Case: 10-60115 Document: 00511324780 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/17/2010 No. 10-60115 I J that He's testimony was not credible. See id. Without a credible showing that h e suffered past persecution or reasonably fears future persecution or torture, H e fails to meet his burden for showing entitlement to relief. See Zhang, 432 F .3 d at 344-45. PETITION DENIED.

3