Petition for review of BIA decision affirming IJ denial of asylum and CAT based on an adverse credibility finding, and alternatively, that
he failed to meet his burden of proof.
The Court found that substantial evidence did not support either inconsistency as a ground for an adverse credibility determination. The court found that petitioner was not given an adequate opportunity to explain the apparent date discrepancy regarding his
address in China, and the BIA should not have relied upon that. The case was remanded to BIA rendering petitioner a prevailing party. EAJA claim was settled.