Xiandong Sun 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
XIANDONG SUN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-70764
Agency No. A099-455-563
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 9, 2012**
Before: RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Xiandong Sun, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal,
and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
FILED
OCT 15 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 09-70764
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings, applying the new standards governing adverse
credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590
F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010), and we review de novo claims of due process
violations, Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination
because Sun’s testimony and declaration stated that his father’s death was partly
attributable to stress caused by Sun’s arrest and detention, but Sun’s application
indicated that his father was alive in China, and Sun failed to explain the
discrepancy. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048 (adverse credibility finding
reasonable under the totality of the circumstances). In the absence of credible
testimony, Sun’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v.
Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Because Sun’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 China, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at
1156-57.

-- 2 of 3 --

3 09-70764
Finally, because Sun was given a full and fair hearing on his claims and a
reasonable opportunity to present evidence, we reject his due process claims. See
Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1276 (9th Cir. 2007).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --