Yan Lin Zhang v. Sessions
686 F. App'x 72
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Petitioner Yan Lin Zhang, a Chinese national, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection after claiming persecution for distributing flyers for an underground church and being arrested in China.
- An Immigration Judge denied relief based on adverse credibility findings; the BIA affirmed (except for an IJ pretermission of asylum on which the BIA did not rely).
- Key credibility problems: discrepancies between Zhang’s asylum application and testimony about whether she struggled with police during arrest; submission of a written statement attributed to her aunt that the aunt repudiated at hearing; and multiple inconsistencies between Zhang’s and her aunt’s testimony about visits, meetings, and knowledge of Zhang’s arrest.
- The IJ found the aunt illiterate and suggested Zhang may have authored the aunt’s written statement, which the agency treated as a false document attributable to Zhang.
- The BIA upheld the adverse credibility determination under the REAL ID Act totality-of-the-circumstances standard, concluding the inconsistencies and false statement infected Zhang’s uncorroborated evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Zhang was credible under the REAL ID Act standard | Zhang argued her testimony and application were consistent; any discrepancy was minor or due to translation | Government argued multiple inconsistencies and a false written statement justified an adverse credibility finding | Court held substantial evidence supported the adverse credibility determination |
| Whether submission of the aunt’s written statement could be attributed as false evidence to Zhang | Zhang contended the aunt actually authored the statement and it was accurate; any contradictions were memory lapses | Government argued the aunt repudiated the statement and appeared illiterate, so the statement was likely fabricated by Zhang | Court held presentation of the false statement (and aunt’s inconsistent testimony) properly supported finding of dishonesty |
| Whether inconsistencies were collateral or could cumulatively negate credibility | Zhang argued inconsistencies were collateral/ancillary and insufficient to defeat credibility | Government argued cumulative inconsistencies and false document infection justified disbelief | Court held even collateral inconsistencies can be consequential in the aggregate and supported the decision |
| Whether remand was required if one inconsistency finding were erroneous | Zhang argued defects in particular findings warranted remand | Government argued the overall credibility ruling was supported by substantial evidence and remand would be futile | Court held remand unnecessary because the adverse credibility ruling would stand on the whole record |
Key Cases Cited
- Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 520 (2d Cir. 2005) (standard for reviewing IJ decision as modified by BIA)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (REAL ID Act totality-of-the-circumstances credibility standard and deference to IJ credibility findings)
- Tu Lin v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d 395 (2d Cir. 2006) (cumulative effect of collateral inconsistencies may be consequential)
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (petitioner must show a reasonable fact-finder would be compelled to credit testimony)
- Siewe v. Gonzales, 480 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2007) (a single false document or testimony attributable to petitioner can infect the record)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (credibility finding dispositive when all claims rest on same factual predicate)
- Lin Zhong v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 480 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 2007) (exhaustion of issues for appeal)
- Lianping Li v. Lynch, 839 F.3d 144 (2d Cir. 2016) (remand is futile where the same adverse credibility outcome is inevitable)