inspected or admitted. He failed to present a single document to support his claim. The IJ found that his testimony was not credible, a finding we must defer to because it is supported by substantial evidence in the record. See D-Muhumed v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 388 F.3d 814, 818 (11th Cir.2004) (“Credibility determinations ... are reviewed under the substantial evidence test.”). And the IJ found that the testimony of his two acquaintances merited little weight, another finding supported by substantial evidence in the record. Second, the Form 1-213 also shows that Cui was never inspected or admitted to the United States. That form is considered to be inherently trustworthy, and Cui did not challenge its admission or accuracy. See Gutierrez-Berdin v. Holder, 618 F.3d 647, 653 (7th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). Because the record does not compel the
holding that it is not holding that form i213 is a presumptively reliable administrative document that is inherently trustworthy when its accuracy is not challenged holding that belowguidelines sentence is presumptively reasonable holding that the burden is on the defendant when the validity of the warrant is challenged holding that attorneys signature is certification that the document is correct