PAUL OJEKWE, AKA Mark Dillard, AKA Mark Anthony Dillard, AKA Paul Chukwugozie… v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PAUL OJEKWE, AKA Mark Dillard,
AKA Mark Anthony Dillard, AKA Paul
Chukwugozie Ojekwe, AKA Agapito
Piedra,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72066
Agency No. A072-862-003
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued March 9, 2012
Submitted December 23, 2013
Pasadena, California
Before: WARDLAW and BERZON, Circuit Judges, and WHYTE, Senior District
Judge.**
FILED
DEC 26 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 Honorable Ronald M. Whyte, Senior District Judge for the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 3 --

Paul Ojekwe petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals
(“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision
denying his claims for withholding of removal and protection under the
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny the petition.
Where the BIA adopts and affirms the decision of the IJ, we review the
decision of the IJ as the final agency determination. See Smolniakova v. Gonzales,
422 F.3d 1037, 1044 (9th Cir. 2005).
(1) Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination
based on Ojekwe’s failure to produce corroborating evidence.
The REAL ID Act requires the IJ to give “notice of the corroboration
required, and an opportunity to either provide that corroboration or explain why he
cannot do so.” Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1091–92 (9th Cir. 2011). The
March 2007 order, in which the IJ found Ojekwe not credible due to his failure to
produce newspaper articles he allegedly authored and Western Union records
demonstrating his financial support for the Bakassi Boys, provided Ojekwe with
such notice. The IJ therefore properly relied on Ojekwe’s failure to produce these
corroborating documents during his second merits hearing seven months later.
Ojekwe’s explanations do not compel the conclusion that such corroborating
evidence was unavailable.
2

-- 2 of 3 --

As “we must uphold an adverse credibility finding ‘[s]o long as one of the
identified grounds is supported by substantial evidence,’” we affirm the IJ’s
determination that Ojekwe’s testimony was not credible. Cortez-Pineda v. Holder,
610 F.3d 1118, 1124 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted).
(2) In the absence of credible testimony, Ojekwe’s withholding of removal
and CAT claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156–57 (9th Cir.
2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3

-- 3 of 3 --