Bi Liu v. Eric Holder, Jr., 412 F. App'x 860

Liu, a Chinese national, entered the United States illegally in 2001 and was ordered removed in 2005 after missing a hearing in Memphis.
He sought multiple reopenings; the Board denied his first two motions and this Court upheld those denials in 2009.
Liu filed a third motion to reopen on July 16, 2009, arguing changed conditions in China due to the one-child policy since 2005.
Since 2006 Liu and his wife have three children; he contends he would face sterilization or heavy fines upon return because of China’s one-child policy in Fuijan Province.
The Board relied on State Department country reports and found Liu’s documentary and testimonial evidence unreliable or insufficient to show a material change in conditions; it denied the motion as time- and number-barred, and the petition for review followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there were changed country conditions justifying reopening	Liu contends conditions in Fuijan Province changed since 2005 due to stricter one-child enforcement	Board found no credible change and gave weight to official reports	No abuse of discretion; no material change warranted reopening
Whether Liu's documentary evidence was properly authenticated and credible	Liu argues documents show increased enforcement and are trustworthy	Board discounted unauthenticated, second-hand submissions as unreliable	Board did not abuse discretion in discounting evidence as unreliable or improperly authenticated
Whether birth of children abroad affects one-child policy treatment for purposes of reopening	Liu argues foreign-born children may be counted differently for policy purposes	Board applied prevailing rule that foreign-born children not registered in China are generally not counted against the policy; Liu’s evidence failed to demonstrate a change	Board’s weight on policy interpretation not an abuse of discretion; no change in circumstances

Yaner Li v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 488 F.3d 1371 (11th Cir. 2007) (recognizes regional changes may allow reopening when credible)
Xue Xian Jiang v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 568 F.3d 1252 (11th Cir. 2009) (supports change in enforcement can permit reopening)
Xiao Jun Liang v. Holder, 626 F.3d 983 (7th Cir. 2010) (treatment of born abroad for one-child policy)
Li Yun Lin v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1164 (3d Cir. 2008) (approach to changed country conditions and asylum framework)
Guo Ping Wu v. Holder, 339 F. App’x 596 (6th Cir. 2009) (6th Cir. adopted approach distinguishing personal vs. country conditions)