Xuqing Zhao v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
XUQING ZHAO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-72049
Agency No. A099-732-104
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 25, 2013**
Before: HAWKINS, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Xuqing Zhao, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
FILED
JUN 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 panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence 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). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility determination,
based on the undisputed testimony from a forensic document analyst that Zhao’s
identity card, bail receipt, and notice of dismissal from his job were all counterfeit.
Khadka v. Holder, 618 F.3d 996, 1001 (9th Cir. 2010) (concluding that, among
other things, applicant’s “failure to disclaim” a fabricated document supported the
conclusion that he was aware of the circumstances of its creation). Contrary to
Zhao’s argument on appeal, the agency considered the totality of the circumstances
in denying his claim. In the absence of credible testimony, Zhao’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
Because Zhao’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony the BIA found
not credible, and the record does not otherwise compel the conclusion that it is
more likely than not that he will be tortured if returned to China, his CAT claim
also fails. See id. at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
12-72049 2

-- 2 of 2 --