CHONGJIN XU V. LORETTA E. LYNCH, No. 13-72452 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 15 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CHONGJIN XU, No. 13-72452 Petitioner, Agency No. A201-060-117 v. MEMORANDUM* LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted December 9, 2015** Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. Respondent’s motion to lift the stay of proceedings is granted. Chongjin Xu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). decision denying her application for asylum and withholding of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss the petition for review. The agency found Xu not credible based on internally inconsistent evidence, inconsistencies between her testimony and application, and on vague, confusing, and non-responsive testimony. We lack jurisdiction to review Xu’s contention that the agency should have considered the eleven-month gap between her immigration hearings in assessing her credibility. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not presented to the agency). Apart from this contention, Xu does not raise any substantive challenge to the agency’s adverse credibility findings. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (“Issues raised in a brief that are not supported by argument are deemed abandoned.”). PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 2 13-72452

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.