Zeidan

Zeidan v. Ashcroft

Good Law
119 F. App'x 88
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 15, 2004No. 03-73666; Agency No. A72-441-110California327 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Maroun Zeidan, a native and citizen of Lebanon, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) opinion affirming an immigration judge’s denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of deportation and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Because the transitional rules apply, we have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). See Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). We review for substantial evidence, Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000), and we deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility finding because Zeidan’s testimony was inconsistent with his asylum application regarding the circumstances surrounding his brothers’ deaths and whether his persecutors continued to actively pursue him after 1987. These events go to the heart of his asylum claim. See Pal v. INS, 204 F.3d 935, 938 (9th Cir.2000) (explaining that inconsistencies in the petitioner’s testimony that go to the heart of applicant’s asylum claim justify an adverse credibility finding). Moreover, the BIA properly rejected Zeidan’s explanation that he. did not know the con *90 tents of his asylum…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.