Zhen Pan v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ZHEN PAN,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 14-70981
Agency No. A088-495-206
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 14, 2016**
Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Zhen Pan, a native and citizen of China, petitions 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
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JUN 24 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 14-70981
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 agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on inconsistencies between Pan’s testimony and documentary evidence as to
the date of her ultrasound examination and omissions of the neighborhood
committee’s threats. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination reasonable
under the “totality of circumstances”). Pan’s explanations do not compel a
contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). Thus, in
the absence of credible testimony, Pan’s asylum and withholding of removal
claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
Finally, Pan’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same testimony the
agency found not credible, and Pan does not point to any other evidence in the
record that compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not she would be
tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official in China. See
Farah, 348 F.3d at 1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --