Opinion
No. 15-72175
04-16-2018
YUHAI ZHANG, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Agency No. A088-323-254 MEMORANDUM On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 15, 2018 San Francisco, California Before: PAEZ and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and ADELMAN, District Judge.
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).
The Honorable Lynn S. Adelman, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, sitting by designation. --------
Yuhai Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals adopting and affirming the decision of an immigration judge (IJ) denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. The IJ found that Zhang lacked credibility as a witness, citing inconsistent testimony and a lack of candor, and that he failed to provide reasonably available evidence to corroborate his claims.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ's adverse credibility determination. See Silva-Pereira v. Lynch, 827 F.3d 1176, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2016). Zhang offered inconsistent testimony on several topics, including when he and his wife first joined a house church in China and his alleged abuse while in custody there, and he repeatedly failed to persuasively reconcile his testimonial inconsistencies when the IJ invited him to do so.
Further, substantial evidence supports the agency's finding that Zhang failed to provide corroborating evidence from his daughter, who had personal knowledge of the basis for his claims and could have either testified before the IJ or provided a written statement. Zhang argues that the IJ denied him notice of the need for corroborating evidence and an opportunity to present it, but Zhang was not entitled to such notice and opportunity because his testimony was not "otherwise credible." Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1091 (9th Cir. 2011); Yali Wang v. Sessions, 861 F.3d 1003, 1009 (9th Cir. 2017). And in any event, the IJ gave Zhang sufficient notice of the need for corroborating evidence.
For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is DENIED.