MD FARUK v. GARLAND (2021)

MD Omar Faruk, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, requests we review the negative credibility determination made against him in his immigration proceedings. He argues the statements and testimony that the Immigration Judge characterized as vague or inconsistent can be read as credible.

We grant deference to an Immigration Judge's credibility determination as upheld by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Wang v. Holder, 569 F. 3d 531, 536-38 (5th Cir. 2009). A credibility finding is proper if based on “any inconsistency or omission ․ as long as the totality of the circumstances” supports the finding. Id. at 538 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Alternate explanations for statements at issue in credibility findings do not necessarily compel us to make a finding. Avelar-Oliva v. Barr, 954 F.3d 757, 768 (5th Cir. 2020)

In this case, the Immigration Judge cited to several vague statements and inconsistencies. Reviewing the record, we are not compelled to find that Faruk was credible.

DENIED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

Per Curiam:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.