Yali Wang v. Jefferson Sessions
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11811
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Yali Wang, a Chinese national, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief after overstaying a tourist visa; IJ denied relief and BIA dismissed the appeal.
- Wang testified she was forced to have an abortion in March 2007 and was subjected to two IUD insertions under China’s family‑planning policies; she claimed a later IUD removal at a private clinic before traveling to the U.S.
- She submitted marriage certificates, a marriage application, medical/surgery records, and an unsworn statement from her husband Gao to corroborate her claims.
- The IJ found multiple documentary anomalies (scratched/altered birth dates and name characters, differing photographs) and gaps in the medical records (blanks, no chain of custody, no records for the alleged IUD procedures), and found Wang’s testimony vague and equivocal.
- The IJ made an adverse credibility determination based on demeanor, vagueness, and documentary concerns, concluding Wang failed to meet her burden for asylum, withholding, and CAT relief; the Ninth Circuit denied review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IJ’s adverse credibility finding was supported by substantial evidence | Wang: IJ relied improperly on documentary unreliability and failed to identify specific testimonial inconsistencies | Gov: IJ permissibly relied on demeanor, vagueness, and problems with documents under REAL ID Act | Held: Adverse credibility supported by substantial evidence; denial affirmed |
| Whether IJ had to find documents were forged or that Wang knew of any falsity before discounting them | Wang: IJ had to find forgery and knowledge per pre‑REAL ID precedent (Yeimane‑Berhe) | Gov: REAL ID Act allows credibility findings based on totality without requiring a forgery/knowledge finding | Held: No need to find forgery or knowledge; IJ may consider document reliability among other factors |
| Whether IJ erred by failing to identify specific inconsistencies or rely on more than documentary issues | Wang: IJ needed specific inconsistent statements to support adverse credibility | Gov: REAL ID Act permits credibility findings based on demeanor, candor, responsiveness, inherent plausibility | Held: IJ may base adverse credibility on demeanor and vagueness even absent discrete contradictions |
| Whether IJ had to notify Wang to produce additional corroboration or permit further evidence (Ren sequential analysis) | Wang: IJ should have given notice/opportunity to supplement documentary evidence | Gov: Ren’s corroboration notice applies only if testimony is otherwise credible; here testimony was not credible so no obligation to reopen | Held: No duty to provide additional opportunity because Wang’s testimony failed Ren’s first-step credibility requirement |
Key Cases Cited
- Ling Huang v. Holder, 744 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 2014) (standard for REAL ID Act credibility review)
- Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083 (9th Cir. 2010) (substantial‑evidence standard for reversing factual findings)
- Yeimane‑Berhe v. Ashcroft, 393 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2004) (pre‑REAL ID case on fraudulent documents and knowledge)
- Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079 (9th Cir. 2011) (sequential analysis and corroboration notice under REAL ID Act)
- Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034 (9th Cir. 2010) (factors for credibility including demeanor and detail)
- Singh v. Holder, 638 F.3d 1264 (9th Cir. 2011) (REAL ID Act permits credibility findings even without external contradictions)
- Elias‑Zacarias v. INS, 502 U.S. 478 (U.S. 1992) (standard that evidence must compel contrary conclusion to overturn factfinding)