Fenshe Liu 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
FENSHE LIU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73047
Agency No. A095-184-748
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 3, 2013**
Pasadena, California
Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, and GOULD and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The record supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding regarding forced
sterilization, because Liu did not offer a “reasonable and plausible explanation” for
his omission of a material claim of persecution. Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083,
FILED
JUN 05 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
1088 (9th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted); accord Kin v. Holder, 595
F.3d 1050, 1056-57 (9th Cir. 2010).
The record also supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding regarding his
relationship with the Falun Gong, because he could not provide an adequate
explanation for the reason that his household registration card indicated that he is a
grain farmer rather than an owner of a construction business. See Rizk, 629 F.3d at
1088. However, even if we were to assume credibility on this issue, the record
supports the IJ’s conclusion that Liu did not establish an objectively reasonable
fear of future persecution.
Because Liu did not adequately brief either his withholding of removal or
CAT claims, these claims are waived. See Kildare v. Saenz, 325 F.3d 1078, 1085
n.3 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --