Fu Feng Lin v. U.S. Attorney General
662 F. App'x 777
| 11th Cir. | 2016Background
- Fu Feng Lin, a Chinese citizen, petitioned for review after denial of asylum and withholding of removal based on persecution for participating in unregistered Christian house churches.
- Lin testified to two incidents: (1) Nov. 20, 2012 raid at Hua Chen’s home—arrest, handcuffing, interrogation calling the church an “evil cult,” five days detention; (2) March 9, 2013 raid at Lin Ming’s home—arrest, 48-hour sleep/food deprivation, repeated beatings in detention, month-plus imprisonment, threats and surveillance after release.
- Lin submitted documentary evidence: letters from his ministers corroborating the raids and mistreatment, and country reports (2012–2013) describing Chinese abuses against unregistered religious groups.
- The Immigration Judge (IJ) and Board found Lin’s testimony conclusory and gave little weight to minister letters and some country-report statements; they relied on portions of reports suggesting limited local interference.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the IJ/Board decision and concluded Lin’s testimony was detailed, credible, and corroborated by documentary evidence, warranting remand to determine whether the harms rose to persecution and risk of future persecution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Lin’s testimony was too conclusory to establish refugee status | Lin: testimony was detailed, consistent with application, described specific arrests, beatings, detention, and post-release threats | Gov: testimony lacked sufficient detail and needed corroboration; country reports undermined claim | Held: Court found testimony sufficiently detailed and credible; not conclusory |
| Whether corroboration was required and if it existed | Lin: minister letters and country reports corroborate his account; some evidence impossible to obtain | Gov: minister letters are interested-witness statements; country reports do not corroborate specific claims | Held: Documentary evidence (letters, reports) sufficiently corroborated testimony; IJ erred in discounting them |
| Whether country reports rebut Lin’s specific claims | Lin: reports show officials punish unregistered churches (beatings, imprisonment, labeling as "evil cults") | Gov: relied on selective, general language minimizing interference in Fujian | Held: Court held IJ improperly relied on generalized portions; specific report statements support Lin’s account |
| Remedy and next steps | Lin: remand to determine whether harms qualified as persecution and future risk | Gov: denial affirmed | Held: Petition granted; remanded for agency to determine whether harms constitute persecution and whether future individualized risk exists |
Key Cases Cited
- Shi v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 707 F.3d 1231 (11th Cir. 2013) (standard of review for BIA decisions)
- Mendoza v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 327 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2003) (reversal requires record compelling reversal)
- Niftaliev v. United States Attorney General, 504 F.3d 1211 (11th Cir. 2007) (testimony with detailed, consistent facts can establish past persecution without corroboration)
- Tang v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 578 F.3d 1270 (11th Cir. 2009) (agency must consider corroborating evidence and not improperly disregard it)
- Gaksakuman v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 767 F.3d 1164 (11th Cir. 2014) (country report generalizations do not necessarily rebut specific applicant testimony)
- Ruiz v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 762 (11th Cir. 2007) (letters from interested witnesses can be probative given their ability to recount firsthand events)