Jie Cui v. Eric H. Holder Jr.
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 7236
| 9th Cir. | 2013Background
- Cui, born 1969 in China, participated in student democracy movements and faced political belief scrutiny by authorities.
- He became a DZ Gong practitioner under Master Yu Qi and taught DZ Gong from 1994 to 1999, despite the state banning the group.
- In 1999–2002 Cui alleges police beatings, arrests, and torture related to DZ Gong and his past activism, including interrogation about Master Yu.
- Cui and fellow DZ Gong teachers briefly fled to Mexico in 2000, aiming to seek asylum in the United States, but remained there for about two years before returning to China in 2002.
- Upon return, Cui was arrested in May 2002, detained for two weeks, and subjected to threats, beatings, and coercive questioning; he allegedly left China for Mexico again in 2003.
- Cui eventually entered the United States via Mexico in 2003, and applied for asylum, with the IJ denying relief based on an adverse credibility finding later affirmed by the BIA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the adverse credibility finding is supported by substantial evidence | Cui contends credibility errors undermine the basis for denial. | BIA/IGH rely on inconsistencies to find lack of credibility that go to the heart of the claim. | Yes; substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility finding. |
| Whether Cui’s two-year stay in Mexico and return to China negate fear of persecution | Cui argues travel and return do not defeat fear of persecution. | The record shows implausibility and lack of efforts to seek asylum in Mexico or the U.S. | Yes; travel to Mexico and voluntary return undermine the asylum claim. |
| Whether the court applies the proper standard of review given pre-REAL ID Act timing | Cui argues credibility errors should be weighed with proper pre-REAL ID Act standards. | Court applies pre-REAL ID Act framework, requiring cogent reasons that go to the heart of the claim. | Yes; proper substantial-evidence standard applied to credibility findings. |
| Whether withholding of removal or CAT relief is properly denied given credibility | Cui asserts potential relief if asylum is denied, based on the same facts. | Without credible asylum, withholding and CAT relief fail as well. | Denied; lack of credible evidence defeats these remedies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Aquilar-Ramos v. Holder, 594 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2010) (review of credibility findings when agency incorporates prior ruling)
- Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2002) (standard for reviewing credibility and factual determinations)
- Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2007) (adverse credibility must go to heart of the claim)
- Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir. 2004) (credibility grounds in asylum cases that go to persecution basis)
- Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2001) (inconsistencies impacting asylum claim credibility)
- Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100 (9th Cir. 2006) (single ground can support adverse credibility if central to claim)
- Jibril v. Gonzales, 423 F.3d 1129 (9th Cir. 2005) (implausible testimony can sustain adverse credibility findings)
- Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2000) (trier of fact must assess credibility when memory or detail is lacking)
- Loho v. Mukasey, 531 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2008) (voluntary return to home country weighs against fear findings)