Muk Hioe v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

Muk Sien Hioe, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision (“IJ”) denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the new standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the Real ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir.2010). We review de novo claims of due process violations. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The IJ found Hioe not credible for several reasons, including discrepancies regarding Hioe’s employment history and his failure to provide additional supporting documents to corroborate his claim of being employed in Bali at the time he was allegedly attacked in Jakarta. These findings provide substantial evidence to support the Id’s adverse credibility determination. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1040-47 . Contrary to Hioe’s contention in…