Xue Zhi Chen v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES On

1
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 08-4185
___________
XUE ZHI CHEN,
Petitioner
v.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES
____________________________________
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
(Agency No. A097-811-549)
Immigration Judge: Honorable Alberto J. Riefkohl
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
October 14, 2009
Before: FUENTES, WEIS and GARTH, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: October 21, 2009)
___________
OPINION
___________
PER CURIAM.
Xue Zhi Chen petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (BIA). For the reasons below, we will deny the petition for review.
Chen, a native of China, entered the United States in December 2003. He

-- 1 of 3 --

Because the BIA concluded that it would uphold the IJ’s adverse credibility1
determination even under the prior standard, we need not decide whether 8 U.S.C.
§ 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii) is consistent with due process. See Wang v. Holder, 569 F. 3d 531,
538 (5th Cir. 2009) (canvassing Circuit law on the provision).
2
was subsequently charged as removable as an arriving alien without entry documents. He
conceded removabilty and filed an application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). He argued that he had been and
would be persecuted in China on the basis of his religion. The IJ found Chen not credible
and denied relief. The BIA agreed and dismissed the appeal. It noted inconsistencies
between Chen’s sworn statement in 2003, his credible fear interview in 2005, and his
testimony at his hearing in 2007, and upheld the IJ’s adverse credibility determination.
Chen filed a timely petition for review.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We must uphold the adverse
credibility finding unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to
the contrary. Fiadjoe v. Attorney General, 411 F. 3d 135, 153 (3d Cir. 2005). Chen1
argues that the IJ should not have based the adverse credibility finding on his conclusion
that Chen did not know much about the Mormon faith or on his rejection of Chen’s
documents. However, because the BIA did not adopt the opinion of the IJ and rendered
its own decision, we review the decision of the BIA and not that of the IJ. Sioe Tjen
Wong v. Attorney General, 539 F.3d 225, 230 (3d Cir. 2008). In upholding the adverse
credibility finding, the BIA relied on the inconsistencies among Chen’s reasons for

-- 2 of 3 --

Even if we reviewed and rejected the IJ’s concerns about Chen’s understanding of2
his religion, the record would not compel a finding that Chen was credible.
3
coming to the United States.
In his sworn statement, Chen indicated that he had no fear of being returned
to China and that he came to the United States to work. C.A.R. at 139-140. In his
credible fear interview, Chen stated that he was persecuted in China as a member of the
Buddhist organization Ai Xing. C.A.R. at 133. At his hearing, he testified that he was
persecuted as a Baptist in China and had been attending a Mormon church in the United
States. C.A.R. at 69, 84. Chen does not dispute the inconsistencies noted by the BIA and
admits that he was untruthful. We conclude that a reasonable adjudicator would not be
compelled to find Chen credible.2
For the above reasons, we will deny the petition for review.

-- 3 of 3 --