Qiu Chen v. Eric Holder, Jr., 715 F.3d 207

Petitioner is a Chinese citizen and mother of two born in the United States seeking asylum due to fear of forced sterilization on return to Fujian.
IJ and BIA denied asylum, finding no well-founded fear; BIA did not decide relocation options raised by petitioner.
Asylum timely despite the one-year deadline because of changed circumstances from birth of second child under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(D).
Petitioner testified local Fujian authorities threatened sterilization after her second child’s birth, risking loss of household registration and public benefits if unregistered.
Board relied on a May 2007 State Department report, neglected other evidence, and ignored a Robert Lin document suggesting coercion under the one-child policy.
Court vacates the Board’s order and remands for rational adjudication incorporating broader evidence of coercion and proper authentication of documents.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether petitioner has a well-founded fear of persecution due to coercive enforcement of the one-child policy	Petitioner argues coerced sterilization risk if returned to Fujian.	Board discounted evidence and treated fear as speculative due to uncertain policy enforcement.	Remanded; Board’s treatment of risk insufficient for rational asylum basis.
Whether the Board properly evaluated documentary evidence and authentic communications from Fujian officials	Letters from local authorities and the Robert Lin document support risk of sterilization.	Documents not authenticated or given insufficient weight; relied on selective reports.	Remand; Board erred in excluding Robert Lin document and other authentic materials.
Whether the petitioner's two U.S.-born children affect eligibility under China’s one-child policy and citizenship status on return	Children are U.S. citizens; policy retaliation could still apply to parents.	Children may be deemed PRC nationals; policy exemptions may apply.	Remand; evidence on citizenship status and policy applicability remains uncertain.
Whether evidence authentication standards applied too narrowly by the Board	Immigration proceedings permit various authenticated methods; non-certification should be allowed.	Board requires specific certification procedures for foreign documents.	Remand; Board must recognize multiple authentication methods and consider self-authenticating or other admissible forms.

Ni v. Holder, 666 F.3d 1064 (7th Cir. 2012) (asylum based on coercive one-child policy enforcement)
Lin v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 596 (7th Cir. 2008) (asylum coercion and evidentiary considerations)
Gebreeyesus v. Gonzales, 482 F.3d 952 (7th Cir. 2007) (authentication not required for unsworn family letters)
Zhang v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 150 (3d Cir. 2005) (authentication of foreign documents; proper evidentiary handling)
Vatyan v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1179 (9th Cir. 2007) (self-authentication and admissibility of foreign documents)
Shtaro v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 711 (1st Cir. 2006) (evidence admissibility in immigration proceedings)