Doris Chidozie-Sapp v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DORIS CHIDOZIE-SAPP,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 14-73731
Agency No. A087-129-035
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 8, 2017**
Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Doris Chidozie-Sapp, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her application for withholding of removal
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
* 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
MAR 16 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-73731
under 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, 1039-1040 (9th
Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on Chidozie-Sapp’s fraudulent marriage to a United States citizen for the
sole purpose of obtaining immigration benefits. See id. at 1048; Singh v. Holder,
643 F.3d 1178, 1181 (9th Cir. 2011) (“An asylum applicant who lies to
immigration authorities casts doubt on his credibility and the rest of his story.”);
Singh v. Holder, 638 F.3d 1264, 1272 (9th Cir. 2011) (“[L]ies and fraudulent
documents when they are no longer necessary for the immediate escape from
persecution do support an adverse inference.”). In the absence of credible
testimony, in this case, Chidozie-Sapp’s withholding of removal claim fails.
Chidozie-Sapp’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same
statements that the agency found not credible, and Chidozie-Sapp does not point to
any evidence that compels the finding it is more likely than not she would be
tortured if returned to Nigeria. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048-49. We reject her
contentions that the IJ ignored evidence.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --