Trinidad Zarate Magallon v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., United States Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TRINIDAD ZARATE MAGALLON
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR.,
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
GENERAL
Respondent.
No. 10-70167
Agency No. A077-759-566
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted January 13, 2014
San Francisco, California
Before: WALLACE and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and MAHAN, District Judge. **
Trinidad Zarate Magallon, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for
FILED
JAN 27 2014
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 James C. Mahan, District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the
District of Nevada, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
We review the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse
credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590
F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on both the conflicts in Zarate’s own testimony, as well as variances between
her testimony and the testimony of her husband, James Clark Miller. See id. The
BIA reasonably rejected Zarate’s explanations for the inconsistencies. See Rivera
v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir. 2007).
Zarate’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same testimony that
was found to be not credible, and she does not point to any other evidence that
shows it is more likely than not that she would be tortured if returned to Mexico.
See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2003).
Finally, we need not reach the question as to whether the IJ and BIA erred
by not allowing Zarate to apply for asylum, as we hold that, due to the adverse
credibility finding, Zarate would not qualify for asylum even if she had been
allowed to apply.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --