Xin-Le Lin v. Ashcroft

Ninth Circuit

Xin-Le Lin v. Ashcroft

109 F. App'x 948

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 23, 2004

DocketNo. 03-72063; Agency No. A77-775-241

StatusPublished

This text of 109 F. App'x 948 (Xin-Le Lin v. Ashcroft) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Xin-Le Lin v. Ashcroft, 109 F. App'x 948 (9th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

Xin-Le Lin, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision summarily affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal and for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. 1252. We review for substantial evidence an adverse credibility determination, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001), and we deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because petitioner’s testimony and evidence contained inconsistencies and implausibilities going to the heart of his asylum claim, including his reasons for leaving China 10 years after his wife was sterilized. See id. at 1043. Because petitioner failed to demonstrate that he was eligible for asylum, it follows that he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

In addition, substantial evidence supports the denial of relief under CAT. See id. at 1157.

PETITION DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM

**

Xin-Le Lin, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision summarily affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal and for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. 1252. We review for substantial evidence an adverse credibility determination, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001), and we deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because petitioner’s testimony and evidence contained inconsistencies and implausibilities going to the heart of his asylum claim, including his reasons for leaving China 10 years after his wife was sterilized. See id. at 1043. Because petitioner failed to demonstrate that he was eligible for asylum, it follows that he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

In addition, substantial evidence supports the denial of relief under CAT. See id. at 1157.

PETITION DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 F. App'x 948, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/xin-le-lin-v-ashcroft-ca9-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack