Purevdorj Ragchaa v. Loretta E. Lynch
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
1. We review adverse credibility determinations for substantial evidence. Shres-ffia v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034,1039 (9th Cir. 2010). Both the IJ and the BIA explicitly invoked the totality of the circumstances standard in their decisions and “provide[d] specific instances in the record that form[ed] the basis of the agency’s adverse credibility determination.” Id. at 1042 .
The IJ evaluated petitioners’ demeanor, the consistency and plausibility of their testimony, and the detail with which they testified. According to the IJ, petitioners were hesitant or evasive at times. Parts of their testimony were inconsistent with each other and with the documentary evidence. Aspects of Ragchaa’s story were implausible, as was his timeline of events. The IJ found that Sukhee’s testimony lacked key details and she couldn’t remember what happened when questioned further on those points. Therefore, the IJ fulfilled her duty to “state explicitly the factors supporting ... her adverse credibility determination.” Id.
The BIA found that the IJ based her adverse credibility determination on “multiple factors,” such as inconsistencies and implausibility in petitioners’ testimony. As an…