Fenshe Liu v. Holder , 520 F. App'x 625 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             JUN 05 2013
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    FENSHE LIU,                                      No. 07-73047
    Petitioner,                        Agency No. A095-184-748
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted June 3, 2013 **
    Pasadena, California
    Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, and GOULD and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    The record supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding regarding forced
    sterilization, because Liu did not offer a “reasonable and plausible explanation” for
    his omission of a material claim of persecution. Rizk v. Holder, 
    629 F.3d 1083
    ,
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    1088 (9th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted); accord Kin v. Holder, 
    595 F.3d 1050
    , 1056-57 (9th Cir. 2010).
    The record also supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding regarding his
    relationship with the Falun Gong, because he could not provide an adequate
    explanation for the reason that his household registration card indicated that he is a
    grain farmer rather than an owner of a construction business. See Rizk, 
    629 F.3d at 1088
    . However, even if we were to assume credibility on this issue, the record
    supports the IJ’s conclusion that Liu did not establish an objectively reasonable
    fear of future persecution.
    Because Liu did not adequately brief either his withholding of removal or
    CAT claims, these claims are waived. See Kildare v. Saenz, 
    325 F.3d 1078
    , 1085
    n.3 (9th Cir. 2003).
    PETITION DENIED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-73047

Citation Numbers: 520 F. App'x 625

Judges: Kozinski, Gould, Smith

Filed Date: 6/5/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024