Yinji Pei v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YINJI PEI,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-71885
Agency No. A099-901-580
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 14, 2016**
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Yinji Pei, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s
decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief
under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under
* 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).
FILED
JUN 22 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-71885
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. Jiang v. Holder, 754 F.3d 733, 738 (9th Cir. 2014).
We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the discrepancies as to the number of times Pei was interrogated, what
information she revealed to police, and the length and type of medical care she
required. See Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1048 (9th Cir. 2010) (adverse
credibility determination was reasonable under the “totality of circumstances”).
Pei’s explanations do not compel the opposite result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d
1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible testimony, Pei’s asylum
and withholding of removal claims fail. See Jiang, 754 F.3d at 740.
Pei’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same testimony the
agency found not credible, and Pei does not point to any other evidence that
compels the finding it is more likely than not she would be tortured by or with the
consent or acquiescence of the government if returned. See id. at 740-41.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --