Ri-Hong Lu v. Ashcroft

MEMORANDUM *

Ri-Hong Lu, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, petitions for *54 review of a final order of the Bureau of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), which adopted the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ’s”) decision to deny his applications for asylum, withholding of deportation and relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a), and grant in part and deny in part the petition.

“When the BIA adopts an IJ’s findings and reasoning, we review the IJ’s opinion as if it were the opinion of the BIA.” Singhr-Kaur v. INS, 188 F.3d 1147 , 1150 (9th Cir.1999). Because the IJ failed to make “an explicit adverse credibility finding, we must assume that [Lu’s] factual contentions are true.” See Kataria v. INS, 232 F.3d 1107, 1114 (9th Cir.2000). Therefore, taking Lu’s testimony as true, we review the IJ’s decision to deny asylum under the substantial evidence standard, and may reverse it only if the evidence presented is such that a reasonable factfinder would be compelled to conclude that the requisite fear of persecution exists. See INS v.…