Mohammady
Mohammady v. Gonzales
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…