041840P.pdf   08/15/2005  Titalayo Falaja  v.  John Ashcroft
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  04-1840
   Agency   
   [PUBLISHED] [Bowman, Author, with M. Arnold and Gruender, 
   Circuit Judges] 
   Petition for Review - Immigration. Immigration Judge's finding that 
   petitioners were not eligible for asylum was supported by substantial 
   evidence, and the IJ's finding that petitioner Titalayo was not credible 
   was supported by specific and convincing reasons; because petitioners 
   were not eligible for asylum, they also failed to meet the higher burden of 
   proof required for withholding of removal; finding that petitioner 
   Titalayo willfully misrepresented material facts was supported by the 
   evidence and the Respondent did not err in finding petitioner was not 
   eligible for adjustment of her status because she was inadmissible to the 
   U.S.; petitioners will have one day to depart voluntarily after the issuance 
   of the court's mandate. 
  
041840P.pdf   05/11/2005  Titalayo Falaja  v.  John Ashcroft
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  04-1840
   Agency   
   Petition for Review - Immigration. The Immigration Judge had specific 
   and cogent reasons for finding petitioner's testimony about her religious 
   persecution was not credible, such as the inadequate and contradictory 
   nature of her testimony and its lack of corroboration, and the IJ did not 
   err in concluding petitioners had failed to establish either past persecution 
   or a well-founded fear of future persecution; because petitioners could 
   not establish their asylum claim, they could not meet the higher burden of 
   proof required for withholding of removal; substantial evidence 
   supported the IJ's finding that petitioner willfully misrepresented material 
   facts in her attempt to gain asylum and that she was inadmissible to the 
   U.S. and correspondingly ineligible for an adjustment of status. 
   [PUBLISHED] [Bowman, Author, with M. Arnold and Gruender, Circuit Judge]