Opinion of the Court — Ma v. Ashcroft

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: June 13, 2002
Case: Ma v. Ashcroft
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

MEMORANDUM *** The petition before us challenges the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (Board) credibility finding and denial of the petitioner’s motion to reopen. Because substantial evidence supports the Board’s adverse credibility determination, we need not address whether the Board improperly required Ma to provide corroborative evidence to support his application. The Board had jurisdiction under 8 C.F.R. §§ 3.1 (b)(3) and 240.53(a), and we have jurisdiction over this timely petition pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b). Ma asserts that the Board should not have discredited his testimony because there are reasonable explanations (other than Ma’s untruthfulness) for the inconsistencies and oddities in his testimony. Whether there are plausible explanations under which Ma’s story might be true is not the appropriate test. Rather, we review the Board’s administrative findings to determine whether “any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” Chen v. INS, 266 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th Cir.2001) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b)(4)(B) (Supp. II 1996)). Ma was unable to provide concrete evidence even of his marriage, so the importance of his credibility was heightened. Ma…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.