Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 11-1684
Submitted:
NIEMEYER,
Decided:
Circuit
Judges,
and
HAMILTON,
PER CURIAM:
Workineh
Ethiopia,
Getachew
petitions
Immigration
for
Appeals
Ayele,
review
(Board)
of
native
an
order
dismissing
and
of
his
citizen
the
Board
appeal
from
of
of
the
of
removal
Torture
and
withholding
(CAT).
Ayele
under
claims
the
that
Convention
the
adverse
Board
and
the
immigration
judge
failed
to
consider
the
review.
We recently summarized the law regarding this Courts
review of a Boards final order in Djadjou v. Holder, 662 F.3d
265, 272-74 (4th Cir. 2011).
show
subjected
eligibility
to
past
for
asylum,
persecution
or
he
has
must
a
show
that
well-founded
In order
he
fear
was
of
If the applicant
In order to
clear
probability
of
persecution
on
account
of
protected
ground.
This Court will uphold the Boards decision unless it
is manifestly contrary to the law and an abuse of discretion.
The standard of review of the agencys findings is narrow and
deferential.
Factual
findings
substantial evidence.
finding
unless
adjudicator
the
would
contrary.
are
affirmed
if
supported
by
have
Therefore,
was
been
we
such
compelled
review
an
that
to
any
reasonable
conclude
adverse
to
the
credibility
judge
must
provide
specific,
cogent
reasons
for
We recognize that
improbable
testimony
are
appropriate
reasons
for
The existence of
An
inconsistency
can
serve
as
basis
for
an
of
the
aliens
claim.
U.S.C.
1158(b)(1)(B)(iii)
An
adverse
credibility
finding
can
support
(denial
of
asylum
relief
can
be
based
solely
upon
an
conclude
credibility
that
substantial
finding.
The
evidence
immigration
supports
judge
and
the
the
Board listed specific and cogent reasons for making the finding.
It was not an abuse of discretion for the immigration judge and
the Board to find that Ayeles numerous omissions were related
directly to his claim for relief.
conclude
that
substantial
evidence
supports
the
We
finding
based
on
his
political
activities
in
the
United
States. *
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
and
materials
We dispense with
legal
before
contentions
the
Court
are
and