ZHANG v. WHITAKER (2018)

MEMORANDUM ***

Qifang Zhang petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a).

The Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. See Kin v. Holder, 595 F.3d 1050, 1054 (9th Cir. 2010). Significant unexplained inconsistencies permeated Zhang’s account of his mistreatment in China. The Immigration Judge gave Zhang opportunities to explain those inconsistencies, but the Board found his explanations unpersuasive and unresponsive. And, particularly relevant to the CAT claim, Zhang’s only corroborating evidence consisted of reports on general trends in religious tolerance and human rights in China. The BIA concluded that those reports were insufficient by themselves to support Zhang’s CAT claim. See Dhital v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 1044, 1051-52 (9th Cir. 2008). We are persuaded that the record did not compel a contrary outcome.

Finally, Zhang’s claim that his due process rights were violated by the Immigration Judge’s conduct during the initial proceedings in his case was not raised before the Board. Zhang “therefore didn’t exhaust that claim, and we lack jurisdiction to review it.” Abebe v. Mukasey, 554 F.3d 1203, 1208 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc); Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).

PETITION DENIED.