Mohammady

Mohammady v. Gonzales

Good Law
126 F. App'x 870
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 14, 2005No. 03-71735California397 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Parvis Mohammady, a native citizen of Iran, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ summary decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 2349 (a), and we deny the petition for review.

We review credibility findings under a substantial evidence standard, and although we accord substantial deference to the IJ, the finding must be based on spe *871 cific, cogent reasons for any stated disbelief. Manimbao v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 655, 658 (9th Cir.2003). Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Mohammady was not credible. Notably, the IJ concluded that it was inconsistent for Mohammady to claim in his application that he was mistreated all his life on account of being a Kurd and Sunni Muslim, while subsequently testifying that no one knew he was a Sunni except his wife, her mother and neighbors. Mohammady urges a different construction. However, “[t]he possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence does not prevent an administrative…

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.