Tiangang Li v. Loretta E. Lynch

MEMORANDUM

Tiangang Li petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming the immigration judge’s (“LJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The IJ denied relief because she found Li’s testimony not credible.

1. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Li was not credible. See Bassene v. Holder, 737 F.3d 530, 536 (9th Cir.2013). The IJ permissibly based her adverse credibility determination in part on Li’s testimony that he returned to China several times after his first arrest, which cast doubt on his claim that he feared he would be persecuted if he returned there. See Loho v. Mukasey, 531 F.3d 1016, 1018 (9th Cir.2008). The IJ was not compelled to accept Li’s explanation that he lost all hope in the govern-' ment only after his second detention and interrogation. See Zamanov v. Holder, 649 F.3d 969, 974 (9th Cir.2011).

Additionally, the IJ did not err in considering Li’s failure to corroborate certain aspects of his testimony in reaching her adverse credibility determination. See Lai v. Holder, 773 F.3d 966, 976 (9th Cir.2014). Nor did the IJ…