Gumercindo Everisario Cuchilla-Ventura 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
GUMERCINDO EVERISARIO
CUCHILLA-VENTURA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-72876
Agency No. A079-417-450
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Gumercindo Everisario Cuchilla-Ventura, a native and citizen of El
Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order
dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his
applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
FILED
APR 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

07-72876 2
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings, Don v. Gonzales, 476
F.3d 738, 741 (9th Cir. 2007), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the discrepancies between Cuchilla-Ventura’s testimony and his sworn
statements during his airport interview as to why he came to the United States. See
Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962-63 (9th Cir. 2004) (when petitioner gives entirely
different reasons for arrival in United States, discrepancy between testimony and
sworn airport interview constitutes substantial evidence). Cuchilla-Ventura’s
contention that the agency failed to produce any evidence regarding the airport
interview is belied by the record. Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s
adverse credibility determination based on the discrepancies between Cuchilla-
Ventura’s testimony and his asylum application regarding the location of the
attacks he suffered in El Salvador. See id. Further, because the agency had reason
to question Cuchilla-Ventura’s credibility, Cuchilla-Ventura’s inability to
corroborate his membership in the church youth group undermines his claim. See
Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1091-92 (9th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, in the absence
of credible testimony, Cuchilla-Ventura’s asylum and withholding of removal
claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

-- 2 of 3 --

07-72876 3
Because Cuchilla-Ventura’s CAT claim is based on the testimony the agency
found not credible, and there is no evidence in the record that compels a finding
that it is more likely than not he would be tortured if returned to El Salvador, his
CAT claim fails. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --