Francisco Alvaro-Iraeta v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANCISCO ALVARO-IRAETA,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71287
Agency No. A071-644-613
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 25, 2015**
Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
The 90-day stay of proceedings in this case expired on July 7, 2015. Thus,
respondent’s motion to lift the stay is denied as moot.
Francisco Alvaro-Iraeta, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
FILED
SEP 04 2015
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 --

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his 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 the agency’s factual findings, including adverse credibility findings.
Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the inconsistencies between Alvaro-Iraeta’s asylum application and his
testimony regarding events in El Salvador and his reason for fleeing. See
Ceballos-Castillo v. INS, 904 F.2d 519, 520 (9th Cir. 1990); Zamanov v. Holder,
649 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir. 2011). We reject Alvaro-Iraeta’s contention that the IJ
failed to properly consider his explanations for the inconsistencies. See Zamanov,
649 F.3d at 974. In the absence of credible testimony, Alvaro-Iraeta’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
Alvaro-Iraeta does not raise any arguments challenging the agency’s denial
of CAT relief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996)
(issues not supported by argument are deemed abandoned).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
12-71287 2

-- 2 of 2 --