Bin Chai v. Holder
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
The IJ’s determination that Chai’s national identification card was fraudulent was supported by substantial evidence. Chai’s submission of the fraudulent national identification card in his application before the immigration judge, and his failure to adequately explain his reasons for using such a card, cut to the heart of Chai’s asylum claim. See Akinmade v. INS, 196 F.3d 951, 956 (9th Cir.1999). The IJ’s determination that Chai gave inconsistent testimony about discrepancies in the photographs in his driver’s license and notarial birth certificate was also supported by substantial evidence. The IJ found Chai’s demeanor to be defensive and contradictory, a finding which supports the adverse credibility determination. See Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1151-52 (9th Cir.1999). Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding. See Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741, 745 (9th Cir.2004).
Chai’s argument that the IJ contradicted herself fails, because the IJ’s finding that Chai was removable to China does not speak to Chai’s credibility. Given the IJ’s *649 adverse credibility determination, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s…