14-4099 

Liu v. Lynch 

BIA 

Nelson, IJ 

A087 652 071

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED 

ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE 

PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT 

FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE 

(WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY 

OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for 

2 the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States 

3 Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 

19th 4 day of April, two thousand sixteen. 

5 

6 PRESENT: 

7 DENNIS JACOBS,

8 PIERRE N. LEVAL, 

9 RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR.,

10 Circuit Judges. 

11 _____________________________________ 

12 

13 HUAGUI LIU, 

14 Petitioner, 

15 

16 v. 14-4099 

17 NAC 

18 LORETTA E. LYNCH, UNITED STATES 

19 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 

20 Respondent. 

21 _____________________________________ 

22 

23 FOR PETITIONER: Gary J. Yerman, New York, New York. 

24 

25 FOR RESPONDENT: Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy 

26 Assistant Attorney General, Civil 

27 Division; Douglas E. Ginsburg, 

28 Assistant Director; Deitz P. Lefort, 

29 Trial Attorney, Office of 
2

1 Immigration Litigation, United 

2 States Department of Justice, 

3 Washington, D.C. 

4 

5 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 

6 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 

7 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is 

8 DENIED. 

9 Petitioner Huagui Liu, a native and citizen of China, seeks 

10 review of an October 10, 2014, decision of the BIA affirming 

11 a July 10, 2013, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying 

12 Liu’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and 

13 relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re 

14 Huagui Liu, No. A087 652 071 (B.I.A. Oct. 10, 2014), aff’g No. 

15 A087 652 071 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Jul. 10, 2013). We assume 

16 the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 

17 procedural history in this case. 

18 Under the circumstances of this case, we have considered 

19 both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions “for the sake of 

20 completeness.” Zaman v. Mukasey, 514 F.3d 233, 237 (2d Cir. 

21 2008) (internal quotations marks and citation omitted). The 

22 applicable standards of review are well established. See 
3

1 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii); see also Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 

2 534 F.3d 162, 165-66 (2d Cir. 2008). 

3 As the Government correctly argues, Liu has waived any 

4 challenges to the agency’s credibility finding or well-founded 

5 fear determination. Liu’s brief contains a heading that refers 

6 to his credibility, but what follows lacks any argument about 

7 this case. This is insufficient to challenge the credibility 

8 determination. See Yueqing Zhang v. Gonzales, 426 F.3d 540, 

9 545 n.7 (2d Cir. 2005). Liu has preserved only a challenge to 

10 the agency’s corroboration finding. 

11 Given the IJ’s adverse credibility determination, the 

12 agency properly considered Liu’s lack of corroborating 

13 evidence. An applicant’s failure to corroborate testimony may 

14 bear on credibility, either because the absence of particular 

15 corroborating evidence is suspicious, or because the absence 

16 of corroboration makes an applicant unable to rehabilitate 

17 testimony that has already been called into question. See Biao 

18 Yang v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 268, 273 (2d Cir. 2007). 

19 A letter from Liu’s wife was entitled to minimal weight 

20 because it was prepared for purposes of litigation, it was not 

21 notarized, and the author was an interested party. Y.C. v. 
4

1 Holder, 741 F.3d 324, 334 (2d Cir. 2013); In re H-L-H- & Z-Y-Z-, 

2 25 I. & N. Dec. 209, 215 (BIA 2010), rev’d on other grounds by 

3 Hui Lin Huang v. Holder, 677 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2012). 

4 The IJ reasonably gave diminished weight to a detention 

5 certificate because, unlike other documents, Liu failed to 

6 authenticate it by any means. Although the agency may err in 

7 rejecting a government document based solely on a failure to 

8 satisfy the authentication regulations, see Cao He Lin v. U.S. 

9 Dep’t of Justice, 428 F.3d 391, 404-05 (2d Cir. 2005), it does 

10 not err where, as here, it discounts documentary evidence for 

11 failure to authenticate by any means and there are “legitimate 

12 concerns” about the applicant’s credibility, Qin Wen Zheng v. 

13 Gonzales, 500 F.3d 143, 148 (2d Cir. 2007). 

14 The agency also reasonably considered Liu’s failure to 

15 provide any documentation from his Chinese church, the hospital 

16 that treated him for his stomach ailment, or the police. Xiao 

17 Ji Chen, 471 F.3d 315, 341 (2d Cir. 2006). The IJ’s 

18 corroboration finding was supported by substantial evidence. 

19 Yan Juan Chen v. Holder, 658 F.3d 246, 252 (2d Cir. 2011).

20 Liu has waived any challenge to the IJ’s adverse 

21 credibility determination and failed to meet his burden with 
5

1 corroborating evidence, and so the agency did not err in denying 

2 asylum. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii). As all of Liu’s claims 

3 share the same factual predicate, the burden finding is 

4 dispositive of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. 

5 Lecaj v. Holder, 616 F.3d 111, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2010). 

6 For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is 

7 DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of removal 

8 that the Court previously granted in this petition is VACATED, 

9 and any pending motion for a stay of removal in this petition 

10 is DISMISSED as moot. Any pending request for oral argument 

11 in this petition is DENIED in accordance with Federal Rule of 

12 Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2), and Second Circuit Local Rule 

13 34.1(b). 

14 FOR THE COURT: 

15 Catherine O=Hagan Wolfe, Clerk