Yuan Lin v. Sessions
699 F. App'x 34
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Yuan Lin, a Chinese national, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief based on persecution for practicing Falun Gong.
- Lin admitted distributing Falun Gong flyers in China and being detained, but testified he did not know the flyers’ contents, did not know what Falun Gong was, and did not know it was illegal.
- Lin also testified that a friend recruited him to hand out flyers and that his parents found an unnamed person to bail him out; he later obtained a letter from his mother to support his claim.
- An Immigration Judge denied relief based on an adverse credibility determination; the BIA affirmed.
- Lin petitioned this Court for review; the Second Circuit reviewed both the IJ and BIA decisions and denied the petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adverse credibility determination | Lin argued his explanations (following instructions, young at time) made his testimony plausible | Government argued inconsistencies, implausible ignorance about Falun Gong, inability to ID bailer, and demeanor supported disbelief | Court upheld adverse credibility finding; substantial evidence supports it |
| Plausibility of Falun Gong practice claim | Lin claimed he practiced/distributed flyers but lacked details because he followed instructions | Government argued one distributing flyers for 10 days would know flyer content and legality; contradictions existed | Court found claim implausible and reasonable to infer Lin would have read flyers |
| Failure to identify person who bailed him out | Lin claimed he was young and did not ask for details; later had mother’s letter | Government argued failure to identify bailer despite time to gather evidence undermines credibility | Court found inability to identify bailer diminished plausibility and supported adverse credibility |
| Demeanor as basis for credibility | Lin implied inconsistent answers were minor or misunderstandings | Government relied on IJ’s observations of unclear, inconsistent testimony (e.g., worry about arrest; attending rallies) | Court gave deference to IJ’s demeanor-based credibility findings and upheld them |
Key Cases Cited
- Yun-Zui Guan v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 391 (2d Cir. 2005) (reviewing agency decisions and standards)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (standards for credibility determinations and totality of circumstances)
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (petitioner must do more than offer a plausible explanation to overturn credibility finding)
- Li Hua Lin v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 453 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2006) (deference to demeanor-based credibility findings)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (same factual predicate defeats asylum, withholding, and CAT when credibility rejected)