Xiang Ping Song v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
XIANG PING SONG,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71825
Agency No. A099-404-173
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 11, 2016**
University of Hawaii Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii
Before: GRABER, BYBEE, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Petitioner Xiang Ping Song seeks review of the Board of Immigration
Appeals’ ("BIA") denial of his claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and
relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We deny the petition.
FILED
FEB 16 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 that this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

Substantial evidence supports the immigration judge’s ("IJ") adverse
credibility finding, which the BIA affirmed. See Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079,
1084–85 (9th Cir. 2011) (explaining the standard of review under the REAL ID
Act). Petitioner was inconsistent in his testimony regarding how long Chinese
officials detained him and his treatment while in custody. The BIA permissibly
concluded that those inconsistencies were not fully explained by faulty translation
on the part of the interpreter at Petitioner’s asylum interview. Petitioner conceded
that the interpreter correctly translated several key responses during the interview.
As the BIA noted, Petitioner’s contention that the interpreter correctly translated
almost all of the interview, but grossly misconstrued only the inconsistent parts, is
implausible. Moreover, Petitioner’s testimony before the IJ was internally
inconsistent as to the number of times Chinese officials arrested him and whether
or not they ever arrested him with his father. The BIA, therefore, properly denied
Petitioner’s claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief.
Petition DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --