Tian Ming Lin v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, Docket No. 06-2356-AG.
Decision Date | 30 October 2006 |
Docket Number | Docket No. 06-2356-AG. |
Citation | 468 F.3d 167 |
Parties | TIAN MING LIN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, Respondents. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Yee Ling Poon, Robert Duk-Hwan Kim, Law Offices of Yee Ling Poon, New York, NY, for petitioner.
R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Anne R. Schultz, Chief, Appellate Division, Laura Thomas Rivero and Kathleen M. Salyer, Assistant United States Attorneys, Miami, FL, for respondents.
Before POOLER, SOTOMAYOR, and KATZMANN, Circuit Judges.
Petitioner Tian Ming Lin, a citizen of the People's Republic of China, moves to remand his case to the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") on the basis of previously unavailable evidence suggesting that forced sterilization is part of the official family-planning policy in Changle City, Fujian Province, China, and that this policy is applied to the repatriated parents of foreign-born children. As the father of two U.S.-born children, Lin claims that he faces forced sterilization if returned to Fujian Province.
Both this Court and the BIA have concluded that the evidence previously available to support Chinese asylum applicants' claims of forced sterilization was inadequate to establish the existence of an official policy of forced sterilization on the part of any Chinese province or locality, and thus insufficient to show that the applicants were likely to face forced sterilization if returned to China. See Wei Guang Wang v. BIA, 437 F.3d 270, 274-76 (2d Cir.2006) ( ); Jian Xing Huang v. U.S. INS, 421 F.3d 125, 129 (2d Cir.2005) ( ); Matter of C-C-, 23 I. & N. Dec. 899, 903 (B.I.A.2006) ( ). This Court and the BIA have both found more persuasive the State Department's China Country Reports, which find no evidence that forced sterilization is part of official Chinese family-planning policy. See Wei Guang Wang, 437 F.3d at 274 ( ); Jian Xing Huang, 421 F.3d at 129 ( ); Matter of C-C-, 23 I. & N. Dec. at 903 ().
Lin is correct, however, that the documents recently presented to this Court for the first time in Shou Yung Guo v. Gonzales, 463...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Li v. U.S. Atty. Gen.
...born in China. At least two of our sister circuits have determined that the Board has made this error before. See Lin v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 468 F.3d 167, 168 (2d Cir.2006), modified, 473 F.3d 48 (2d Cir.2007) (rejecting the distinction in the light of evidence presented by applicant in ......
-
Lin v. U.S. Dept. of Justice
...would face forced sterilization if returned to Fujian Province. We granted Lin's motion to remand. See Tian Ming Lin v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 468 F.3d 167 (2d Cir.2006) (per curiam). We now grant the government's petition for rehearing and revisit the basis for our earlier decision. Becaus......
-
Chen v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, Docket No. 06-0762-AG.
...undermine the BIA's and our continued reliance on the State Department reports. In Tian Ming Lin v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 468 F.3d 167, No. 06-2356, 2006 WL 3060101 (2d Cir. Oct.30, 2006) (per curiam), we granted a motion to remand in light of the Shou Yung Guo documents in another case in......