Kolushko v. Holder , 361 F. App'x 768 ( 2010 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAN 05 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
HANNA YURIEVNA KOLUSHKO, aka No. 05-76651
Hanna Julia Hryhorehok, aka Anaid
Garibyan, Agency No. A079-727-302
Petitioner,
MEMORANDUM *
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Hanna Yurievna Kolushko, a native of the former Soviet Union and citizen
of Ukraine, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order
*
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).
KN/Research
dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her
application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. §
1252. Reviewing for substantial evidence, Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738, 741
(9th Cir. 2007), we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on Kolushko’s omissions from her asylum application that police beat her
with a baton and kicked her during a political protest in Snyatin, and that the
hospital purposefully gave her inadequate medical treatment because of her
political beliefs, which caused her child to be stillborn. See Alvarez-Santos v. INS,
332 F.3d 1245, 1254 (9th Cir. 2003) (petitioner’s omission of a “dramatic incident”
from asylum application supported adverse credibility determination). In the
absence of credible testimony, Kolushko failed to establish she is eligible for
asylum or withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
petitioner failed to establish a likelihood of torture in Ukraine. See Wakkary v.
Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED
KN/Research 2 05-76651