Nai Wu Jiang v. Boente
678 F. App'x 41
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Petitioner Nai Wu Jiang, a Chinese national, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief based on alleged Christian practice and persecution.
- IJ denied relief in Dec. 2013, finding Jiang not credible and that he knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application; BIA affirmed in Aug. 2015.
- Jiang admitted fabricating his initial asylum application and testified inconsistently about his receipt of written warnings and his religious practice.
- The IJ relied on Jiang’s admission plus lack of corroboration (aside from a New York church letter) to discredit his claim of practicing Christianity in the U.S.
- The IJ found Jiang knowingly filed a frivolous application after providing notice and an opportunity to explain; that finding bars him from immigration benefits tied to his U.S. marriage.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adverse credibility | Jiang: testimony credible; initial false application was due to prior counsel; he did not receive translated warnings | Gov: Jiang admitted fabricating application; record shows signed English/Chinese notices; little corroboration of religious practice | Court: Substantial evidence supports adverse credibility; credibility determination dispositive of asylum, withholding, CAT |
| Frivolousness of asylum application | Jiang: warning on form may not have been translated; argued reliance on prior attorney | Gov: Signed statements and interview testimony show Jiang knowingly filed fabricated application | Court: IJ gave adequate notice, found knowing fabrication by preponderance; frivolousness finding upheld |
| Effect of frivolousness on other relief | Jiang: challenges scope and effect | Gov: Frivolousness bars all immigration benefits, including those from marriage | Court: Frivolousness bars Jiang from immigration benefits arising from marriage |
| Standard of review / notice sufficiency | Jiang: relies on Gade Niang nuance about receipt/understanding | Gov: credibility finding permits rejecting Jiang’s claim he lacked notice; record contains notices | Court: Gade Niang not controlling for Jiang given adverse credibility; notice in record sufficient |
Key Cases Cited
- Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 520 (2d Cir. 2005) (scope of review when BIA modifies IJ decision)
- Yanqin Weng v. Holder, 562 F.3d 510 (2d Cir. 2009) (standards for reviewing agency credibility findings)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (REAL ID Act permits credibility findings based on inconsistencies without regard to heart-of-the-claim)
- Siewe v. Gonzales, 480 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2007) (single instance of false testimony or document can infect other evidence)
- Biao Yang v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 2007) (corroboration requirements for religious-practice claims)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (credibility findings can be dispositive of asylum, withholding, and CAT claims)
- Mei Juan Zheng v. Mukasey, 514 F.3d 176 (2d Cir. 2008) (requirements for frivolousness findings)
- Gade Niang v. Holder, 762 F.3d 251 (2d Cir. 2014) (written warning in application can satisfy notice requirement)