Sona Mirijanyan v. Eric Holder, Jr.

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 02 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SONA MIRIJANYAN; et al., No. 11-73915
Petitioners, Agency Nos. A095-633-925
A095-633-926
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, MEMORANDUM*
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2014**
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Sona Mirijanyan and her daughter, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
*
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).
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence the agency’s factual findings, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042
(9th Cir. 2001), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the inconsistencies between Mirijanyan’s testimony and written
application regarding the central incident of harm Mirijanyan allegedly suffered,
and where she lived at the time. See id. at 1043 (inconsistencies about the events
leading up to petitioner’s departure and the number of times he was arrested went
to the heart of the claim). Mirijanyan’s explanations do not compel the opposite
result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). The record does not
support Mirijanyan’s contention that the agency failed to fully consider her
explanations or testimony. In the absence of credible testimony, petitioners’
asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d
1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Finally, Mirijanyan’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same
testimony the agency found not credible, and she does not point to any other
evidence in the record that compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not
she would be tortured if returned to Armenia. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 11-73915