Robert Mangasaryan v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERT MANGASARYAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-73950
Agency No. A077-835-150
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted January 8, 2014
Pasadena, California
Before: W. FLETCHER, M. SMITH, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
The Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) adverse credibility determination
is not supported by substantial evidence. The BIA relied on alleged
inconsistencies in Mangasaryan’s testimony regarding the sequence of events and
the intervals between events, but those alleged inconsistencies are legitimately
explained by the obvious difficulty Mangasaryan experienced converting dates
FILED
JAN 24 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

-- 1 of 2 --

Page 2 of 2
from the Farsi calendar to the Gregorian calendar. See Zahedi v. INS, 222 F.3d
1157, 1167 (9th Cir. 2000). The only arguable exception involves Mangasaryan’s
testimony regarding the interval between the border and store incidents, but we
have held that a single inconsistency of this sort does not constitute substantial
evidence. See Vilorio-Lopez v. INS, 852 F.2d 1137, 1139, 1142 (9th Cir. 1988).
As we concluded in 2009 on Mangasaryan’s first appeal to this court, he
may be able to show a nexus to a protected ground once his testimony is properly
credited. Mangasaryan v. Holder, 334 F. App’x 87, 88–89 (9th Cir. 2009). We
remand to the BIA to consider the merits of his asylum and withholding of removal
claims, with instructions to deem his testimony credible.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --