GIOVANNI ARISTIDES DURAN, AKA Giovanni Duran v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GIOVANNI ARISTIDES DURAN, AKA
Giovanni Duran,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-70469
Agency No. A094-316-243
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 23, 2017**
Before: McKEOWN, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Giovanni Aristides Duran, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for deferral of removal under
the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
* 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
OCT 30 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-70469
§ 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 Duran’s omission from his first two asylum applications of information
regarding the harm his brother experienced from the MS-13 gang. See Shrestha,
593 F.3d at 1047; Zamanov v. Holder, 649 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir. 2011) (an
applicant “present[ing] substantially different accounts of mistreatment in
successive asylum petitions” can constitute a material alteration sufficient to
support an adverse credibility finding). Duran’s explanations do not compel a
contrary conclusion. See Zamanov, 649 F.3d at 974.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --