Anaida Galustian 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).
NED/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANAIDA GALUSTIAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-70613
Agency No. A075-742-529
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Anaida Galustian, a native of the former Soviet Union and a citizen of
Georgia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order
dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her
FILED
DEC 28 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

NED/Research 07-70613 2
application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. 1252.
We review for substantial evidence, Wang v. INS, 352 F.3d 1250, 1253 (9th Cir.
2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The forensic expert’s testimony and report provide substantial evidence to
support the agency’s finding that Galustian submitted a false driver’s license. See
Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741, 745 (9th Cir. 2004). Because the genuineness of
this identity document went to the heart of Galustian’s asylum claim, substantial
evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination. See id.; see also
Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003) (characterizing identity as
a key element of an asylum claim). In the absence of credible evidence, Galustian
failed to demonstrate eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal. See Farah,
348 F.3d at 1156..
Galustian has failed to set forth any substantive argument regarding the
agency’s denial of CAT relief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-
60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not supported by argument are deemed waived).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --