Zhang
Aolin Zhang v. Holder
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Aolin Zhang petitions for review of the decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the denial of his claims for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We lack jurisdiction to review any pure questions of fact underlying the BIA’s determination that Zhang did not file his asylum application within one year of his arrival in the United States, 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3); we dismiss Zhang’s arguments to the extent that they raise such factual questions. Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , we have jurisdiction over Zhang’s remaining claims. Because we conclude that substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility determination, we deny the petition for review.
The facts of this case are known to the parties. We do not repeat them.
We review the BIA’s adverse credibility findings for substantial evidence. Guo v. Ashcroft, 361 F.3d 1194, 1199 (9th Cir.2004). We uphold the BIA’s credibility findings “unless the evidence compels a contrary result.” Joseph v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1235, 1240 (9th Cir.2010). We review the decisions of both the immigration judge (“U”) and the BIA because the BIA…