Li Lin v. Sessions
687 F. App'x 30
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Li Lin, a native of the People's Republic of China, seeks asylum, withholdings of removal, and CAT relief.
- The BIA affirmed a 2015 decision affirming an IJ's 2013 denial of Lin's applications based on credibility.
- The IJ found Lin not credible regarding the claim that Chinese family planning officials forced an abortion.
- The credibility finding relied on Lin's unresponsiveness to questions by the IJ and opposing counsel.
- Inconsistencies in the timing of Lin's alleged pregnancy and lack of medical corroboration supported the adverse credibility finding.
- The Court held the credibility finding dispositive because all relief requests depend on the same factual predicate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the adverse credibility finding supported by substantial evidence? | Lin contends inconsistency and demeanor undermine credibility. | Agency properly relied on unresponsiveness and record inconsistencies. | Yes; substantial evidence supports adverse credibility finding. |
| Is the credibility finding dispositive of all relief claims? | If not credible on asylum, cannot be denied on that basis alone for CAT/withholding. | All relief relies on same facts; credibility controls all claims. | Yes; credibility finding disposes of asylum, withholding, and CAT relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wangchuck v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 448 F.3d 524 (2d Cir. 2006) (review for completeness; totality of the circumstances may support credibility finding)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (credibility based on demeanor, inconsistencies, and corroboration gaps)
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (demeanor and unresponsiveness relevant to credibility findings)
- Li Hua Lin v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 453 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2006) (timing inconsistencies corroboration issues supporting credibility determinations)
- Biao Yang v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 2007) (lack of medical corroboration can support adverse credibility findings)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (relief based on same factual predicate requires credibility for all claims)