NINA OGANESIAN V. LORETTA E. LYNCH, No. 14-72348 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED AUG 23 2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NINA ALEKSEEVNA OGANESIAN, Petitioner, v. No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 14-72348 Agency No. A099-452-963 MEMORANDUM* LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted August 16, 2016** Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges. Nina Alekseevna Oganesian, a native of Armenia and citizen of Bulgaria, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the * 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). Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have 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. The BIA found Oganesian not credible based on inconsistencies between her testimony, her asylum application, and a previous visa application regarding her marital and work history. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility determination. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility finding reasonable under the “totality of circumstances”). In the absence of credible testimony, Oganesian’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). In light of our disposition, we do not reach Oganesian’s remaining contentions. Finally, Oganesian’s CAT claim fails because it is based on the same evidence that was found not credible and the record does not otherwise compel the conclusion that it is more likely than not she will be tortured by or with consent or acquiescence of the Bulgarian government. See id. at 1156-57. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 14-72348
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
