Chang Yan v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

MEMORANDUM **

Chang Yan petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of Yan’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Yan’s application centered on his allegation that he was persecuted for practicing Christianity in China. Our analysis is governed by the REAL ID Act, and we deny the petition for review.

Yan primarily argues that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was not supported by substantial evidence. We disagree. Under the REAL ID Act, “[¡Inconsistencies no longer need to ‘go to the heart’ of the petitioner’s claim to form the basis of an adverse credibility determination.” Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1043 (9th Cir.2010) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (b)(1)(B)(iii)). Thus, “even minor inconsistencies, in proper circumstances, will support an adverse credibility determination.” Id. at 1043 n. 4.

Here, the IJ identified several inconsistencies that properly supported the ruling. For example, in his written application, Yan stated that, after his arrest, police officers first brought him into a room, then told him to empty his…

dissenting:

The inconsistencies and omissions identified by the Immigration Judge are of a *631 trivial character without bearing on the credibility of Yan’s testimony. Subject to such flyspecking, few applicants for asylum and few appellate judges would pass as credible witnesses. The IJ strains to find Yan not credible. The court engages in the same strain.

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 13 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHANG YAN, No. 08-73948

Petitioner, Agency No. A099-364-835

v.

MEMORANDUM*

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 18, 2013** San Francisco, California

Before: NOONAN, TASHIMA, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Chang Yan petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of Yan’s

application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)(C). Against Torture (“CAT”). Yan’s application centered on his allegation that he was

persecuted for practicing Christianity in China. Our analysis is governed by…