Si Zhong Wu v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SI ZHONG WU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-71161
Agency No. A097-660-651
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 26, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Si Zhong Wu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence,
FILED
JUL 06 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-71161 2
Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100, 1105 (9th Cir. 2006), and we grant the petition
for review and remand.
The agency’s adverse credibility determination is not supported by
substantial evidence because the agency relied exclusively on inconsistencies
between Wu’s testimony at the merits hearing and the credible fear interview notes
which, in this case, lacked sufficient indicia of reliability. See Singh v. Gonzales,
403 F.3d 1081, 1089-90 (9th Cir. 2005). Remand for further findings is not
necessary in this case because it is apparent from the record that the agency listed
all possible reasons to support an adverse credibility determination. See
Soto-Olarte v. Holder, 555 F.3d 1089, 1095 (9th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, we
grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings, deeming Wu’s
testimony credible. See id. at 1095-96; see also INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18
(2002) (per curiam).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --