Hai Shun Piao v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HAI SHUN PIAO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71444
Agency No. A098-473-573
MEMORANDUM*
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.
Hai Shun Piao, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from the
immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
FILED
DEC 2 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.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility
determinations created by the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034,
1040 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the inconsistencies between Piao’s testimony and documents regarding
where she worked and the dates of her employment. See id. at 1048 (adverse
credibility finding reasonable in totality of the circumstances). Piao’s explanations
do not compel a contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.
2000). In the absence of credible testimony, Piao’s asylum and withholding of
removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Finally, Piao’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same testimony the
agency found not credible, and Piao 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 by or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official in China. See
id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
12-71444 2

-- 2 of 2 --