credibility finding is for these reasons not supported by substantial evidence, on remand, Cordova is to be deemed credible for the purposes of assessing his asylum and withholding claims. See Soto-Olarte v. Holder, 555 F.3d 1089, 1094-95 (9th Cir.2009) (“the deemed credible rule may apply when it is evident that the IJ and BIA have both strained to provide reasons properly supporting an adverse credibility finding, but despite their best efforts have been unable to do so”). 3. Because the BIA’s decision did not cite Matter of Burbano, 20 I. & N. Dec. 872 (BIA 1994), nor did it expressly adopt the IJ’s alternative findings, this court cannot presently address the question whether Cordova was persecuted on a protected ground. See Joseph v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1235, 1239 (9th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); see also Gonzales v. Thomas, 547 U.S. 183,
holding expressly that this court properly held that such decision by secretary is mandatory holding that the bia adopts the ijs entire decision when it cites burbano and expresses no disagreement with the ijs decision holding no due process violation where the bia affirms the ijs decision without issuing a separate opinion holding that this courts review is limited to the bia decision and the portions of the ijs decision that it expressly adopted holding that we will not review portions of an ijs ruling that are not adopted by the bia