Siang Piow Liu v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Circuit Rule 36-3.
The Honorable Robert J. Timlin, United States District Judge for the**
Central District of California, sitting by designation.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SIANG PIOW LIU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-73831
Agency No. A028-525-886
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted October 4, 2010
Pasadena, California
Before: WARDLAW and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and
TIMLIN, Senior District Judge.**
Liu Siang Piow, a native and citizen of Malaysia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision finding his asylum application time-barred
and denying withholding of removal. We deny the petition for review.
FILED
NOV 10 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision that an asylum application
is untimely and not excused by changed circumstances unless the facts underlying
the alleged change in circumstances are undisputed. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3);
Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 650 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing 8 U.S.C. §
1252(a)(2)). Liu alleged that the Malaysian government’s monitoring of his
internet activism constituted a changed circumstance. The immigration judge and
the BIA did not credit Liu’s testimony that any Malaysian agent monitored his
postings. Therefore, the facts underlying the changed circumstances are disputed,
and we must dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
We deny the petition to review the BIA’s decision denying withholding of
removal. Substantial evidence supported the BIA’s determination that Liu’s
testimony was not credible and that he did not establish that the Malaysian
government was aware of his postings. Accordingly, Liu has failed to show that it
is more likely than not that he will be persecuted based on his online postings.
The petition is DISMISSED in part and DENIED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --