Martha Calmo Pablo v. Loretta E. Lynch ( 2015 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 1 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARTHA CALMO PABLO, AKA Yuridia No. 13-72909
Diaz Perez,
Agency No. A200-566-208
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 22, 2015**
Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Martha Calmo Pablo, native and a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from
an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding
*
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).
of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility
determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034,
1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the inconsistencies regarding when Calmo suffered a miscarriage and
whether she told her parents about a threatening phone call from her attacker. See
id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under the “totality of
circumstances”). Calmo’s explanations for the inconsistencies do not compel a
contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). Thus, in
the absence of credible testimony, Calmo’s asylum and withholding of removal
claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Finally, Calmo’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same
evidence the agency found not credible, and Calmo does not point to any other
evidence that compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not she would be
tortured if returned to Guatemala. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 13-72909