Wenqing Zhang v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WENQING ZHANG,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-73287
Agency No. A088-124-663
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 24, 2016**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Wenqing Zhang, 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, withholding of removal, and
relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under
FILED
FEB 29 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 --

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings,
applying 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 we
deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on discrepancies within Zhang’s testimony regarding his work schedule and
church attendance in China, as well as his inconsistent and unresponsive answers
to questions regarding documentary evidence. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility
finding reasonable under the totality of the circumstances). Zhang’s explanations
do not compel a contrary result. See Zamanov v. Holder, 649 F.3d 969, 974 (9th
Cir. 2011). In the absence of credible testimony, Zhang’s asylum and withholding
of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.
2003).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Zhang’s CAT
claim because it was based on the same evidence found not credible and the record
does not otherwise compel the finding that it is more likely than not Zhang would
be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to
China. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048-49.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-73287 2

-- 2 of 2 --