Milagros Cerros-Henriquez v. Loretta E. Lynch

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MILAGROS CERROS-HENRIQUEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH,
Respondent.
No. 13-73067
A72-177-101
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review from an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 9, 2015**
Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Milagros Cerros-Henriquez, a native and citizen of El Salvador petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing an appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum and
withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
DEC 16 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 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 --

for substantial evidence findings of fact, including adverse credibility
determinations, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir. 2001), and we
deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on an inconsistency between Cerros-Henriquez’s testimony and written
statements as to whether she was present when guerillas assaulted her family. See
id. at 1043. We reject Cerros-Henriquez’s contention that there can be no adverse
credibility finding where the oral testimony diminishes, rather than enhances the
claim. See Kaur v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 1061, 1065 (9th Cir. 2005) (rejecting a per
se rule that whenever inconsistencies weaken an asylum claim they cannot serve as
the basis of a credibility finding). In the absence of credible testimony, Cerros-
Henriquez’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v.
Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-73067 2

-- 2 of 2 --