Amirkhanyan v. Gonzales , 385 F. App'x 626 ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 21 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ARMEN AMIRKHANYAN, aka Armen No. 07-70679
Amirkhanian; GAYANE MAGHAKYAN;
YELENA AMIRKHANYAN, aka Yelena Agency Nos. A075-758-453
Amirkhanian, A097-854-240
A078-635-759
Petitioners,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted June 10, 2010
Pasadena, California
Before: TROTT and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and MAHAN, District
Judge.**
Armen Amirkhanyan, his wife Gayane Amirkhanyan, and their child Yelena
Amirkhanyan, all natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for review of the Board
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The Honorable James C. Mahan, United States District Judge for the
District of Nevada, sitting by designation.
of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for asylum, withholding of
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review adverse credibility findings for
substantial evidence. Soto-Olarte v. Holder, 555 F.3d 1089, 1091 (9th Cir. 2009).
We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination
because the discrepancies regarding Armen’s hospitalization go to the heart of his
claim, see Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962, 964 (9th Cir. 2004), and Armen failed
to provide a sufficient explanation for the discrepancies, see de Leon-Barrios v.
INS, 116 F.3d 391, 393-94 (9th Cir. 1997). Further, the IJ’s finding that Armen’s
demeanor indicated he was not testifying with complete honesty is supported by
specific and cogent non-credible aspects of his demeanor and is entitled to “special
deference.” See Arulampalam v. Ashcroft, 353 F.3d 679, 685-86 (9th Cir. 2003);
Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1151 (9th Cir. 1999).
In the absence of credible testimony, Armen failed to establish eligibility for
asylum or withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
2
Because Armen’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony found to be not
credible, and Armen does not point to any other evidence that shows it is more
likely than not he would be tortured if returned to Armenia, his CAT claim fails.
See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3