410 F. App'x 15
9th Cir.2010Background
- Deng, a native and citizen of the PRC, petitions for asylum denial by the BIA after an IJ adverse credibility finding.
- The IJ based the adverse credibility finding on five grounds related to Deng’s testimony, asylum application, and documentary record.
- The IJ found inconsistencies between Deng’s testimony and his asylum application, and questioned his doctrinal knowledge of Christianity.
- The IJ relied on State Department reports suggesting religious freedom conditions and persecution of house churches to counter Deng’s claimed persecution.
- The IJ purportedly found it hard to believe Deng could obtain a visa and leave China with little difficulty, based on conjecture rather than substantial evidence.
- The BIA adopted the IJ’s findings, but the Board remanded the case for further proceedings under Ventura after concluding the credibility finding lacked substantial support.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the adverse credibility finding is supported by substantial evidence | Deng argues the finding rests on improper or non-cogent bases | IJ/BIA relied on inconsistencies and record gaps to deem Deng not credible | No; credibility finding not supported by substantial evidence |
| Whether lack of corroboration letters justifies adverse credibility | Corroboration not required when not readily available | Lack of corroboration undermines credibility | No; corroboration not mandatory when not easily available |
| Whether misreading or selective use of State Dept reports undermines credibility | Reports show persecution; misreading framed Deng as not persecuted | State Dept reports undermine asylum claim | No; adverse credibility not supported by the cited evidence |
| Whether speculative inference about Deng's ability to obtain a visa is improper | No basis in record for disbelief about travel visa | Record implies difficulty exiting China | No; speculation cannot sustain adverse credibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Shah v. INS, 220 F.3d 1062 (9th Cir. 2000) (speculation cannot ground adverse credibility; must be substantial evidence)
- Lopez-Reyes v. INS, 79 F.3d 908 (9th Cir. 1996) (conjecture not substitute for substantial evidence)
- Cordon-Garcia v. INS, 204 F.3d 985 (9th Cir. 2000) (requires specific cogent reasons to support adverse credibility finding)
- Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2000) (corroborating evidence not always easily available)
- Cosa v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2008) (cannot equate lack of doctrinal knowledge with insincerity)
- Chun Rong Jiang v. Gonzales, 485 F.3d 992 (7th Cir. 2007) (non-citizen's religious belief sincerity examined beyond doctrinal knowledge)