Gang Zheng v. Sessions
696 F. App'x 546
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Petitioner Gang Zheng, a Chinese national, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection based on alleged fear of persecution for practicing Christianity.
- IJ denied relief on July 14, 2014; the BIA affirmed on November 16, 2015. Zheng petitioned for review in the Second Circuit.
- Zheng testified he became a Christian in the U.S.; he said only his family in China knows of his conversion and he did not attend church regularly in the U.S.
- The agency found no past persecution and concluded Zheng failed to show a well‑founded fear of future persecution either individually or as part of a group.
- The agency relied on evidence of nationwide variation in treatment of Christians in China and the fact Zheng’s mother continues to attend an underground church without incident.
- The Second Circuit reviewed both the IJ and BIA decisions and denied the petition for review, vacating any stay of removal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Zheng has a well‑founded fear of individual persecution | Zheng fears persecution in China for his Christian faith if returned | Government: Zheng offered no evidence authorities know of his faith; fear is speculative | Held: Zheng failed to show authorities are or would be aware; fear is speculative — no individual risk |
| Whether there is a pattern or practice of persecution of Christians in China | Zheng argued Christians face persecution nationwide | Government: Evidence shows regional variation; no nationwide pattern | Held: Record shows regional variation; no pattern or practice established |
| Whether denial of asylum requires denial of withholding of removal | Zheng contends he meets higher standard for withholding | Government: Withholding requires a higher showing of likelihood of persecution | Held: Because asylum denied, Zheng necessarily fails to meet withholding standard |
| CAT relief denial | Zheng sought CAT relief | Government: CAT relief not shown | Held: Zheng did not challenge CAT denial on appeal; agency denial stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Wangchuck v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 448 F.3d 524 (2d Cir. 2006) (standard for reviewing IJ and BIA decisions)
- Yanqin Weng v. Holder, 562 F.3d 510 (2d Cir. 2009) (standards of review for asylum claims)
- Dong Zhong Zheng v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 277 (2d Cir. 2009) (definition of well‑founded fear)
- Y.C. v. Holder, 741 F.3d 324 (2d Cir. 2013) (methods to show well‑founded fear: individual or pattern/practice)
- Jian Xing Huang v. INS, 421 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2005) (fear speculative without solid record support)
- Hongsheng Leng v. Mukasey, 528 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2008) (authorities’ awareness of applicant’s activities required absent past persecution)
- Melgar de Torres v. Reno, 191 F.3d 307 (2d Cir. 1999) (similarly situated family remaining unharmed undermines fear)
- Xiao Ji Chen v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 471 F.3d 315 (2d Cir. 2006) (weight of evidence lies with IJ regarding country conditions)
- Santoso v. Holder, 580 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2009) (no pattern/practice where persecution is not nationwide)
- Lecaj v. Holder, 616 F.3d 111 (2d Cir. 2010) (asylum denial implies withholding denial)