Shaoyun Qu v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHAOYUN QU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74683
Agency No. A096-362-786
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Shaoyun Qu, 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”) decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal.
FILED
NOV 01 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-74683 2
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence,
Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738, 741 (9th Cir. 2007), and we deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination
because the IJ made a specific and cogent demeanor finding, see Arulampalam v.
Ashcroft, 353 F.3d 679, 686 (9th Cir. 2003), and because the inconsistencies with
respect to Qu’s home address, as well as his admission that he fabricated this
address on his asylum application, are material and go to the heart of his claims,
see Don, 476 F.3d at 741-43. Further, because the IJ had reason to question Qu’s
credibility, Qu’s failure to provide corroborating evidence undermines his claim.
See Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1091-92 (9th Cir. 2000). Absent credible
testimony, Qu’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v.
Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --