Razzak

Razzak v. Keisler

Good Law
249 F. App'x 683
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 2, 2007No. 06-72878California298 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Abed Razzak, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“LI”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . “[Wjhere the BIA cites its decision in Burbano and does not express disagreement with any part of the IJ’s decision, the BIA adopts the IJ’s decision in its entirety.” Abebe v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 1037, 1040 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc) (citation omitted). We review for substantial evidence, see Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2004), and we deny the petition for review.

*684 Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding that Razzak’s testimony concerning his persecution incident lacked sufficient detail. See Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir.2007). Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s finding that Razzak testified inconsistently as to which group was persecuting him. See de Leon-Barrios v. INS, 116 F.3d 391 , 393-94 (9th Cir.1997). Because these issues go to the heart of Razzak’s claim, the IJ’s…

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.