WEN HUEI CHENG a.k.a. En Hui Zheng 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
WEN HUEI CHENG a.k.a. En Hui Zheng,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-74593
Agency No. A095-687-729
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 21, 2012**
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Wen Huei Cheng, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
FILED
FEB 28 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-74593 2
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the
agency’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 agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on, among other findings, the inconsistency between Cheng’s testimony and
the two different birth certificates she presented regarding her birthplace. See Pal
v. INS, 204 F.3d 935, 938 (9th Cir. 2000). Cheng’s explanation that she is illiterate
does not compel a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th
Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible testimony, Cheng’s asylum and withholding
of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.
2003).
Because Cheng’s CAT claim is based on the testimony the agency found not
credible, and she points to no other evidence showing it is more likely than not she
will be tortured if returned to China, her CAT claim also fails. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --