Hongbo Gu v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HONGBO GU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-71542
Agency No. A088-453-658
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 19, 2013**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Hongbo Gu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board
of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s
decision denying his application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
FILED
DEC 5 2013
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 --

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 agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on Gu’s inconsistency regarding when his wife’s IUD was removed, see
Goel v. Gonzales, 490 F.3d 735, 739 (9th Cir. 2007), and the omission of the
government seizure of his home from his asylum application, see Zamanov v.
Holder, 649 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir. 2011) (“Material alterations in the applicant’s
account of persecution are sufficient to support an adverse credibility finding.”).
The agency reasonably rejected Gu’s explanations for the inconsistency and
omission. See Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir. 2007). In the
absence of credible testimony, Gu’s withholding of removal claim fails.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --