Song Sheng Zhang v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SONG SHENG ZHANG,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-73727
Agency No. A046-474-271
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 26, 2016**
Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Song Sheng 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 (“IJ”) order finding Zhang removable and denying his application under 8
U.S.C. § 1186a(c)(4)(B) for waiver of the joint filing requirement to remove the
FILED
AUG 01 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 --

conditional basis of his lawful permanent resident status. We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s denial of
a waiver under 8 U.S.C. § 1186a(c)(4)(B). Damon v. Ashcroft, 360 F.3d 1084,
1087 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Zhang’s application for
a waiver under 8 U.S.C. § 1186a(c)(4)(B), where the limited evidence Zhang
provided was insufficient to show that he entered into his marriage to his former
United States citizen spouse in good faith. See 8 U.S.C. § 1186a(c)(4)(B) (to
establish eligibility for this waiver, the alien must demonstrate that “the qualifying
marriage was entered into in good faith by the alien spouse”).
To the extent Zhang challenges the IJ’s conclusions concerning the
availability of corroborating evidence, the IJ’s determination is supported by
substantial evidence. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4) (“No court shall reverse a
determination made by a trier of fact with respect to the availability of
corroborating evidence, . . . unless the court finds . . . that a reasonable trier of fact
is compelled to conclude that such corroborating evidence is unavailable.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
14-73727 2

-- 2 of 2 --