Huang Zheng v. Sessions
698 F. App'x 656
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Zheng, a Chinese national, appealed the BIA’s June 27, 2016 decision affirming an IJ’s denial (June 10, 2015) of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief.
- The agency’s decision rested primarily on an adverse credibility determination about Zheng’s testimony and documentary evidence.
- The IJ found multiple supporting handwritten letters (from Zheng’s mother and a friend, Mr. Wu) suspicious because pairs of letters allegedly written on different days contained identical language.
- A church letter submitted on Zheng’s behalf omitted any mention of his alleged arrest, detention, or mistreatment despite his testimony that church members witnessed his arrest.
- Zheng’s medical-treatment evidence (treatment at a government hospital while allegedly hiding) was deemed implausible given his claimed fear of authorities and prior reliance on an unlicensed doctor after detention.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adverse credibility based on handwritten letters | Zheng: letters authentic; mother didn’t keep original; later explanation that mother retained copy submitted on appeal | Government: identical language in purportedly separate handwritten letters suggests fabrication | Court upheld IJ/BIA: substantial evidence supports finding letters fraudulent and adverse credibility valid |
| Fraud finding’s effect on other corroboration (Mr. Wu’s letters) | Zheng: letters legitimate corroboration | Government: same suspicious circumstances as mother’s letters justify treating them as fraudulent | Court: IJ reasonably found Mr. Wu’s letters untrustworthy; fraud finding taints related evidence |
| Omissions in church letter | Zheng: church might have known only basic info, so omission not probative | Government: omission undermines claim because Zheng attended church long enough that leaders would know of arrest | Court: omission reasonably supports adverse credibility finding |
| Implausibility of medical-treatment evidence | Zheng: sought treatment consistent with injuries/illness | Government: receiving treatment at government hospital while allegedly hiding is implausible, especially given prior avoidance of official care | Court: IJ’s inference that hospital visits undermined plausibility is reasonable and supported by record |
Key Cases Cited
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (standards for adverse credibility review)
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (petitioner must do more than offer plausible explanation for inconsistencies)
- Siewe v. Gonzales, 480 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2007) (fraudulent evidence finding affects probative force of related evidence)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (adverse credibility dispositive for asylum, withholding, and CAT relief when claims rely on credibility)
- Jian Hui Shao v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 138 (2d Cir. 2008) (standards on evidence and credibility assessments)
- Cao v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 421 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 2005) (standard for reopening proceedings for new evidence)
- Immigration & Naturalization Serv. v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94 (1988) (standard for motions to reopen)