Dupe Kuforiji; 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
DUPE KUFORIJI; et al.,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73304
Agency Nos. A097-520-697
A097-520-698
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.
Dupe Kuforiji and her daughter, natives and citizens of Nigeria, petition pro
se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their application for asylum and
withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
NOV 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-73304 2
for substantial evidence the IJ’s factual findings, applying the new standards
governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act.
Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination
based on the inconsistencies regarding Kuforiji’s identity and marital status, and
her failure to provide sufficient corroboration in the absence of credible testimony.
See id., at 1040-44 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable “[i]n the
totality of circumstances”); see also Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1046 (9th Cir.
2009) (“[t]he highly deferential standard of review compels us to let stand the
BIA’s determination that petitioner's corroboration was insufficient.”).
Accordingly, in the absence of credible testimony, petitioners’ 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 --