Chinaryan

Chinaryan v. Gonzales

Good Law
234 F. App'x 772
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 13, 2007No. 05-74114California403 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Azatuhi Chinaryan petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order, which affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying Chinaryan’s application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the petition.

The BIA’s decision relied on the IJ’s reasoning and reviewed the IJ’s factual findings for clear error. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1 (d)(3). We look to the IJ’s decision “as a guide to what lay behind the BIA’s conclusion,” Kozulin v. INS, 218 F.3d 1112, 1115 (9th Cir.2000), and review the IJ’s findings for substantial evidence, Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.2000). We will grant the petition for review only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1185 (9th Cir.2006).

The BIA and IJ identified “specific, cogent reasons” to support an adverse credibility determination that “go to the heart of petitioner’s claim.” Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741, 745 (9th Cir.2004). The record supports the IJ’s determination that Chinaryan submitted a fraudulent letter, purportedly from her…

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.