Dong Yang v. Sessions
696 F. App'x 534
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Yang is a native and citizen of China seeking asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief in immigration proceedings.
- The BIA affirmed an IJ’s 2015 decision denying asylum, withholding, and CAT relief.
- The IJ found Yang not credible after an adverse credibility assessment based on inconsistencies and omissions in his testimony and written materials.
- Yang’s evidence included letters from his wife and a friend (Ping) offered to corroborate his testimony, which the IJ gave diminished weight.
- The agency’s determination relied on inconsistencies between Yang’s statements and Ping’s and wife’s letters, and on collateral discrepancies such as his hospital visit timing and his address on applications.
- The petition is denied, and the request for a stay of removal and any oral argument are resolved accordingly.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the adverse credibility finding supports denial of all relief | Yang | Yang's credibility undermined | Yes; credibility dispositive of all claims |
| Whether inconsistencies and omissions justify adverse credibility finding | Yang | Inconsistencies properly found | Yes; corroboration insufficient to rehabilitate credibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (credibility determinations may rely on inconsistencies and omissions)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (totality of circumstances supports credibility assessments)
- Biao Yang v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 2007) (failure to corroborate can bear on credibility)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (unfavorable inference from inconsistent or uncorroborated testimony)
- Yun-Zui Guan v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 391 (2d Cir. 2005) (framework for reviewing credibility determinations)