Yanfu Wei v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YANFU WEI,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-72607
Agency No. A099-068-085
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 20, 2016**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Yanfu Wei, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s
decision denying his application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying
FILED
JAN 26 2016
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 --

the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID
Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010), and deny the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on omissions in Wei’s application and testimony, and based on lack of
detail, internal inconsistencies, and implausibilities in Wei’s testimony. See
Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048 (adverse credibility finding reasonable under the
totality of the circumstances); see also Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738, 743 (9th
Cir. 2007) (implausible aspects of petitioner’s account supported adverse
credibility finding); Kin v. Holder, 595 F.3d 1050, 1056-57 (9th Cir. 2010)
(omission and insufficient explanation for omission supported adverse credibility
finding). Wei’s explanations do not compel a contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 204
F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). The record does not support Wei’s contention
that the agency disregarded corroborative evidence, and we reject Wei’s contention
that his documentary evidence overcomes the agency’s adverse credibility finding.
See Garcia v. Holder, 749 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2014) (documents not sufficient
to rehabilitate testimony). In the absence of credible testimony, Wei’s asylum
claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-72607 2

-- 2 of 2 --