Pateh Jabbi 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).
The Honorable Richard F. Cebull, United States District Judge for the***
District of Montana, sitting by designation.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PATEH JABBI,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-70965
Agency No. A099-340-108
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 15, 2010**
Seattle, Washington
Before: RYMER and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and CEBULL, Chief
District Judge.***
Pateh Jabbi, native and citizen of The Gambia, petitions for review of a
decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration
FILED
AUG 05 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2
judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief
under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The BIA denied relief on the basis
of an adverse credibility finding. The provisions of the REAL ID Act govern our
review. See REAL ID Act § 101(h)(2), Pub. L. No. 109-13, 119 Stat. 231, 305
(2005) (stating that the amendments are applicable to asylum applications filed on
or after the date of enactment). We deny the petition for review.
1. The BIA did not err in holding that the IJ properly admitted and
considered the asylum officer’s notes and Assessment to Refer. First, Jabbi’s
counsel did not object to their admission. Second, neither Ninth Circuit precedent
nor internal agency guidelines mandates that these documents are inadmissible in
asylum hearings. The documents were probative and their admission was
fundamentally fair. See Espinoza v. INS, 45 F.3d 308, 310 (9th Cir. 1995).
2. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility finding.
The BIA identified four reasons for its finding. Jabbi did not challenge two of
these four reasons for the BIA finding before this court. He has therefore waived
any challenge to these two grounds. See Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 1069,
1072 (9th Cir. 2005). Additionally, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s
adverse credibility determination that (1) Jabbi’s statements in his testimony,
asylum interview, and asylum application regarding his relationship with the

-- 2 of 3 --

3
United Democratic Party leader, Ousainu Darboe, were inconsistent and
undermined Jabbi’s claim of persecution and (2) Jabbi was unable to provide a
satisfactory explanation for this inconsistency. In the absence of credible
testimony, Jabbi failed to demonstrate eligibility for asylum or withholding of
removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Because Jabbi’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony found to be not
credible, and he points to no other evidence the IJ should have considered,
substantial evidence also supports the denial of CAT relief. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --