
    Paul OJEKWE, aka Mark Dillard, aka Mark Anthony Dillard, aka Paul Chukwugozie Ojekwe, aka Agapito Piedra, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 08-72066.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued March 9, 2012.
    Submitted Dec. 23, 2013.
    Filed Dec. 26, 2013.
    Susan Elizabeth Hill, Hill, Piibe & Ville-gas, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
    OIL, Brooke Maurer, Trial, Richard M. Evans, Esquire, Assistant Director, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: WARDLAW and BERZON, Circuit Judges, and WHYTE, Senior District Judge.
    
    
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Paul Ojekwe petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his claims for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny the petition.

Where the BlA adopts and affirms the decision of the IJ, we review the decision of the IJ as the final agency determination. See Smolniakova v. Gonzales, 422 F.3d 1037, 1044 (9th Cir.2005).

(1) Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination based on Ojekwe’s failure to produce corroborating evidence.

The REAL ID Act requires the IJ to give “notice of the corroboration required, and an opportunity to either provide that corroboration or explain why he cannot do so.” Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1091-92 (9th Cir.2011). The March 2007 order, in which the IJ found Ojekwe not credible due to his failure to produce newspaper articles he allegedly authored and Western Union records demonstrating his financial support for the Bakassi Boys, provided Ojekwe with such notice. The IJ therefore properly relied on Ojekwe’s failure to produce these corroborating documents during his second merits hearing seven months later. Ojekwe’s explanations do not compel the conclusion that such corroborating evidence was unavailable.

As “we must uphold an adverse credibility finding ‘[s]o long as one of the identified grounds is supported by substantial evidence,’ ” we affirm the IJ’s determination that Ojekwe’s testimony was not credible. Cortez-Pineda v. Holder, 610 F.3d 1118, 1124 (9th Cir.2010) (citation omitted).

(2) In the absence of credible testimony, Oj ekwe’s withholding of removal and CAT claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       The Honorable Ronald M. Whyte, Senior District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.
     