
    Nethie Nara ASPELLY, a.k.a. Magda Arlande Raphael, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 09-70503.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 17, 2013.
    
    Filed Jan. 3, 2014.
    Nethie Nara Aspelly, San Diego, CA, pro se.
    James A. Hurley, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Nethie Nara Aspelly, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir.2010), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on significant inconsistencies in As-pelly’s testimony regarding the incident that led her to leave Port-au-Prince and whether anything happened to her after she moved to Cap-Haitien. See id. at 1045-48 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under the REAL ID Act’s “totality of the circumstances” standard). The agency reasonably rejected Aspelly’s explanations for the inconsistencies. See Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir.2007). In the absence of credible testimony, Aspelly’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s finding that even if Aspelly is a member of the student group Association National Lycee, the country conditions evidence does not show it is more likely than not she would be tortured if returned to Haiti. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir.2008). Thus, her CAT claim also fails.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
      
         This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
     