Abdulraqeb Ahmed Abdo Rageh, a.k.a. Basheer Abdo Mohammed Ahmed 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ABDULRAQEB AHMED ABDO
RAGEH, a.k.a. Basheer Abdo Mohammed
Ahmed,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74817
Agency No. A096-400-682
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 19, 2011**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Abdulraqeb Ahmed Abdo Rageh, a native and citizen of Yemen, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from
an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding
FILED
JAN 04 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 08-74817
of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
the agency’s factual findings, Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir.
2010), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Rageh fails to challenge the agency’s dispositive determination that his
asylum application was time-barred. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256,
1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues that are not addressed in the argument portion of a
brief are deemed waived). Accordingly, his asylum claim fails.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
because Rageh omitted from his asylum application and declaration that he was
jailed by local police in cooperation with his persecutors, see Husyev v. Mukasey,
528 F.3d 1172, 1183 (9th Cir. 2008), and the agency reasonably rejected his
explanation for the omission, see Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir.
2007). In the absence of credible testimony, Rageh’s withholding of removal
claim fails. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Because Rageh’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony found to be not
credible, and he points to no other evidence that shows it is more likely than not he
would be tortured if returned to Yemen, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at
1156-57.

-- 2 of 3 --

3 08-74817
Finally, we lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary decision to
deny voluntary departure. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Gil v. Holder, 651 F.3d
1000, 1006 (9th Cir. 2011).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 3 of 3 --