FI L ED

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S

EL EVENTH CI RCUI T

MAY 13, 2010

J OHN L EY

CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

N o

. 0 9

- 1 3 7 6 6

N o n

- A r g u m e n t C a l e n d a r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A g e n c y N o

. A 0 7 0

- 7 0 4

- 0 1 2

W E N

- X I N G W A N G

,

P e t i t i o n e r

,

v e r s u s

U

. S

. A T T O R N E Y G E N E R A L

,

R e s p o n d e n t

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

P e t i t i o n f o r R e v i e w o f a D e c i s i o n o f t h e

B o a r d o f I m m i g r a t i o n A p p e a l s

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

( M a y 1 3

, 2 0 1 0 )

B e f o r e E D M O N D S O N

, H U L L a n d A N D E R S O N

, C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.

P E R C U R I A M :

W e n

- X i n g W a n g

, a c i t i z e n o f C h i n a

, p e t i t i o n s f o r r e v i e w o f t h e B o a r d o fI m m i g r a t i o n A p p e a l s ’ ( “ B I A ” ) o r d e r a f f i r m i n g t h e I m m i g r a t i o n J u d g e ’ s ( “ I J ” )

d e n i a l o f h i s m o t i o n t o r e o p e n h i s r e m o v a l p r o c e e d i n g s

. W a n g ’ s A p r i l 2 5

, 2 0 0 8

m o t i o n t o r e o p e n w a s b a s e d o n h i s c l a i m t h a t c o u n t r y c o n d i t i o n s i n C h i n a h a v e

c h a n g e d s i n c e t h e B I A ’ s A u g u s t 3 1

, 2 0 0 6 r e m o v a l o r d e r b e c a u s e C h i n a h a s

i n c r e a s e d e n f

o r c e m e n t o f i t s f

a m i l y

- p l a n n i n g s t e r i l i z a t i o n p o l i c i e s

. B e c a u s e W a n g

h a s t w o c h i l d r e n

, h e c o n t e n d s t h a t h e w o u l d b e s u b j e c t t o f o r c e d s t e r i l i z a t i o n i f h e

r e t u r n e d t o C h i n a

. A f

t e r r e v i e w

, w e d e n y W a n g ’ s p e t i t i o n

. 1

A n a l i e n m a y f

i l e o n e m o t i o n t o r e o p e n r e m o v a l p r o c e e d i n g s

, a n d t h a t

m o t i o n m u s t “ s t a t e t h e n e w f a c t s t h a t w i l l b e p r o v e n a t a h e a r i n g t o b e h e l d i f t h e

m o t i o n i s g r a n t e d

, a n d s h a l l b e s u p p o r t e d b y a f f i d a v i t s o r o t h e r e v i d e n t i a r y

m a t e r i a l

. ” I m m i g r a t i o n a n d N a t i o n a l i t y A c t ( “ I N A ” ) § 2 4 0 B ( c ) ( 7 ) ( A )

, ( B )

, 8

U

. S

. C

. § 1 2 2 9 a ( c ) ( 7 ) ( A )

, ( B )

. G e n e r a l l y

, t h e m o t i o n t o r e o p e n m u s t b e f i l e d w i t h i n

n i n e t y d a y s o f t h e B I A ’ s f i n a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e m o v a l o r d e r

. I N A

§ 2 4 0 ( c ) ( 7 ) ( C ) ( i )

, 8 U

. S

. C

. § 1 2 2 9 a ( c ) ( 7 ) ( C ) ( i ) ; 8 C

. F

. R

. § 1 0 0 3

. 2 ( c ) ( 2 )

. H o w e v e r

,

t h e n i n e t y

- d a y d e a d l i n e a n d o n e

- m o t i o n l i m i t d o n o t a p p l y i f t h e m o t i o n t o r e o p e n

i s b a s e d o n c h a n g e d c o u n t r y c o n d i t i o n s

. I N A § 2 4 0 ( c ) ( 7 ) ( C ) ( i i )

, 8 U

. S

. C

.

We review the denial of

a motion to reopen f

or abuse of discre tion. Abdi v. U.S. Att’y 1

Gen., 430 F .3d 1148, 1149 (11th Cir. 2005). Review is “limited to deter mining whe ther ther e

has bee n an exerc ise of administrative discr etion and whe ther the ma tter of e x erc ise has bee n

arbitra ry or ca pricious.” I d. (quotation marks omitted). Where , as her e, the B I A expressly

adopted the I J ’s re asons for the ruling , we r eview the I J ’s and the B I A’s dec isions. Al Najjar v.

Ashcrof t, 257 F.3d 1262, 1284 (11th Cir. 2001).

2§ 1 2 2 9 a ( c ) ( 7 ) ( C ) ( i i ) ; 8 C

. F

. R

. § 1 0 0 3

. 2 ( c ) ( 3 ) ( i i )

.

B e c a u s e m o t i o n s t o r e o p e n a r e d i s f a v o r e d

, e s p e c i a l l y i n r e m o v a l

p r o c e e d i n g s

, t h e m o v a n t b e a r s a “ h e a v y b u r d e n

. ” Z h a n g v

. U

. S

. A t t ’ y G e n

. , 5 7 2

F

. 3 d 1 3 1 6

, 1 3 1 9 ( 1 1 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 9 )

. T o m e e t t h e e x c e p t i o n t o t h e n i n e t y

- d a y f i l i n g

d e a d l i n e

, t h e m o v a n t m u s t s h o w t h a t t h e r e i s n e w e v i d e n c e t h a t i s m a t e r i a l a n d w a s

n o t a v a i l a b l e a n d c o u l d n o t h a v e b e e n d i s c o v e r e d o r p r e s e n t e d a t t h e r e m o v a l

h e a r i n g

. S e e 8 C

. F

. R

. § § 1 0 0 3

. 2 ( c ) ( 1 )

, 1 0 0 3

. 2 3 ( b ) ( 3 ) ; s e e a l s o V e r a n o

- V e l a s c o v

.

U

. S

. A t t ’ y G e n

. , 4 5 6 F

. 3 d 1 3 7 2

, 1 3 7 6 ( 1 1 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 6 ) ; A b d i

, 4 3 0 F

. 3 d a t 1 1 4 9

.

E v i d e n c e i s n o t “ n e w ” i f i t w a s a v a i l a b l e a n d c o u l d h a v e b e e n p r e s e n t e d a t t h e

a l i e n s f o r m e r h e a r i n g

. V e r a n o

- V e l a s c o

, 4 5 6 F

. 3 d a t 1 3 7 2

. T o b e “ m a t e r i a l

, ” t h e

e v i d e n c e m u s t b e t h e k i n d t h a t

, i f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s w e r e r e o p e n e d

, w o u l d l i k e l y

c h a n g e t h e r e s u l t i n t h e c a s e

. S e e A l i v

. U

. S

. A t t ’ y G e n

. , 4 4 3 F

. 3 d 8 0 4

, 8 1 3 ( 1 1 t h

C i r

. 2 0 0 6 )

. T h u s

, t h e B I A m a y d e n y a m o t i o n t o r e o p e n b e c a u s e t h e a l i e n f a i l e d t o

s u b m i t e v i d e n c e t h a t w a s m a t e r i a l a n d p r e v i o u s l y u n a v a i l a b l e

. S e e A l N a j j a r

, 2 5 7

F

. 3 d a t 1 3 0 2

.

W e h a v e c o n c l u d e d t h a t e v i d e n c e o f a r e c e n t i n c r e a s e d c a m p a i g n o f f o r c e d

s t e r i l i z a t i o n i n t h e a l i e n ’ s h o m e v i l l a g e m a y s a t i s f y t h e c h a n g e d c o u n t r y c o n d i t i o n s

r e q u i r e m e n t f

o r f i l i n g a m o t i o n t o r e o p e n o u t s i d e t h e n i n e t y

- d a y f i l i n g d e a d l i n e

.

S e e

, e

. g

. J i a n g v

. U

. S

. A t t ’ y G e n

. , 5 6 8 F

. 3 d 1 2 5 2

, 1 2 5 4 ( 1 1 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 9 ) ; L i v

. U

. S

.

A t t ’ y G e n

. , 4 8 8 F

. 3 d 1 3 7 1

, 1 3 7 5 ( 1 1 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 7 )

. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d

, t h e b i r t h o f a

3c h i l d c o n s t i t u t e s a c h a n g e i n p e r s o n a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s

, n o t a c h a n g e i n c o u n t r y

c o n d i t i o n s

, a n d d o e s n o t s a t i s f y t h e r e q u i r e m e n t

. S e e 8 C

. F

. R

. § 1 0 0 3

. 2 3 ( b ) ( 4 ) ( i )

( r e q u i r i n g m o t i o n s t o r e o p e n a f t e r t h e n i n e t y

- d a y d e a d l i n e t o b e “ b a s e d o n c h a n g e d

c o u n t r y c o n d i t i o n s a r i s i n g i n t h e c o u n t r y o f n a t i o n a l i t y ” )

.

H e r e

, t h e I J a n d t h e B I A d i d n o t a b u s e t h e i r d i s c r e t i o n i n d e n y i n g W a n g ’ s

m o t i o n t o r e o p e n b e c a u s e W a n g ’ s e v i d e n c e e i t h e r w a s p r e v i o u s l y a v a i l a b l e o r d i d

n o t d e m o n s t r a t e a n i n c r e a s e d c a m p a i g n o f f o r c e d s t e r i l i z a t i o n i n h i s h o m e v i l l a g e

.

W a n g d o e s n o t d i s p u t e t h a t h i s m o t i o n w a s f i l e d o u t s i d e t h e n i n e t y

- d a y f i l i n g

d e a d l i n e a n d t h a t h e n e e d e d t o p r e s e n t e v i d e n c e o f c h a n g e d c o u n t r y c o n d i t i o n s

p o s t

- d a t i n g h i s 2 0 0 6 r e m o v a l p r o c e e d i n g s i n o r d e r f o r h i s m o t i o n t o b e g r a n t e d

. 2

A r e v i e w o f t h e r e c o r d s h o w s t h a t

, u n l i k e t h e p e t i t i o n e r s i n L i a n d J i a n g

,

c i t e d a b o v e

, W a n g ’ s e v i d e n c e d i d n o t d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e o n e

c h i l d p o l i c y t h r o u g h f

o r c e d s t e r i l i z a t i o n s h a s i n c r e a s e d i n h i s h o m e v i l l a g e o f F u q i

V i l l a g e

, H o u y u T o w n

, C h a n g l e C i t y i n F u j i a n P r o v i n c e s i n c e t h e A u g u s t 3 1

, 2 0 0 6

o r d e r g r a n t i n g h i m v o l u n t a r y d e p a r t u r e

. A n u m b e r o f W a n g ’ s d o c u m e n t s p r e

3

d a t e d h i s o r i g i n a l a s y l u m c l a i m o r r e f e r e n c e d i n f

o r m a t i o n t h a t p r e d a t e d h i s a s y l u m

I n 2003, Wang f

iled his asy lum application, alleg ing r elig ious persec ution. W ang later 2

withdrew his application with prejudice, wa s g rante d voluntary depar ture on Aug ust 31, 2006

and wa s order ed to depa

rt the country

by Dec ember

29, 2006. Wang did not depa rt and filed this

motion to reopen on April 25, 2008. Thus, Wang ’s evidenc e in support of his motion to reopen

must show a chang e in conditions in China since the B I A’s Aug ust 31, 2006 order.

Contrary to Wang’ s assertion, the B I A consider ed ea ch piec e of e vidence Wang 3

submitt ed and c oncluded that his evide nce w as insufficie nt to meet Wang’ s burden of proof.

4a p p l i c a t i o n

. T h i s e v i d e n c e w a s n o t “ p r e v i o u s l y u n a v a i l a b l e ” a n d d i d n o t a i d h i s

c u r r e n t m o t i o n t o r e o p e n

. O t h e r d o c u m e n t s e i t h e r : ( 1 ) d e t a i l e d e n f o r c e m e n t o f

C h i n a ’ s f a m i l y p l a n n i n g l a w s i n o t h e r p r o v i n c e s

, b u t d i d n o t a d d r e s s t h e

e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e f

a m i l y p l a n n i n g l a w s i n W a n g ’ s h o m e p r o v i n c e o f F u j i a n ; o r

( 2 ) f a i l e d t o s t a t e a n y c h a n g e i n t h e e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e f

a m i l y p l a n n i n g l a w s f

r o m

p r e v i o u s y e a r s

. I n s u m

, w h i l e m o s t o f W a n g ’ s e v i d e n c e s h o w s t h a t C h i n e s e

o f f i c i a l s c o n t i n u e t o e n f

o r c e f a m i l y p l a n n i n g p o l i c i e s

, i n c l u d i n g s o m e f o r c e d

s t e r i l i z a t i o n s

, i t d o e s n o t s h o w a n e s c a l a t i o n o f e n f o r c e m e n t i n W a n g ’ s h o m e

v i l l a g e

.

W a n g s u b m i t t e d s e v e r a l d o c u m e n t s t h a t r e l a t e s p e c i f i c a l l y t o f

a m i l y

p l a n n i n g p o l i c i e s i n F u

j i a n P r o v i n c e o r i n W a n g ’ s h o m e v i l l a g e

. H o w e v e r

, m o s t o f

t h e s e d o c u m e n t s d i d n o t d e m o n s t r a t e a m a t e r i a l c h a n g e i n e n f o r c e m e n t

. F o r

e x a m p l e

, o n e d o c u m e n t

, a p r o c l a m a t i o n t o i n d i v i d u a l d i s t r i c t a n d c i t y p l a n n i n g

c o m m i t t e e s

, w a s a r e m i n d e r t o i m p l e m e n t t h e g o a l s a n d p r a c t i c e s o f t h e p o l i c i e s

.

A s t h e B I A e x p l a i n e d

, n o t h i n g i n t h e p r o c l a m a t i o n i n d i c a t e s t h a t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f

t h e g o a l s a n d p r a c t i c e s w a s a c h a n g e i n p o l i c y

. A n o t h e r d o c u m e n t w a s a M a r c h

2 0 0 8 n o t i c e f

r o m t h e “ V i l l a g e r s ’ C o m m i t t e e ” i n W a n g ’ s h o m e v i l l a g e r e s p o n d i n g

t o W a n g ’ s i n q u i r y

. T h e n o t i c e s t a t e d t h a t

, u n d e r t h e f a m i l y p l a n n i n g p o l i c y

, W a n g

w o u l d b e r e q u i r e d t o u n d e r g o s t e r i l i z a t i o n u p o n h i s r e t u r n b e c a u s e h e h a s t w o

c h i l d r e n

. A l t h o u g h t h e B I A g a v e l i t t l e w e i g h t t o t h i s d o c u m e n t b e c a u s e i t w a s

5u n a u t h e n t i c a t e d

, i t a l s o n o t e d t h a t t h e d o c u m e n t f a i l e d t o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h i s

e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e f

a m i l y p l a n n i n g p o l i c y p o s t

- d a t e d W a n g ’ s r e m o v a l

p r o c e e d i n g s

. I n o t h e r w o r d s

, t h e n o t i c e d o e s n o t i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e p o l i c y i s b e i n g

m o r e s t r i c t l y e n f

o r c e d s i n c e A u g u s t 3 1

, 2 0 0 6

. 4

W a n g a l s o s u b m i t t e d t w o d o c u m e n t s t h a t d o s u g g e s t a n i n c r e a s e i n

e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e f

a m i l y p l a n n i n g p o l i c i e s

. F i r s t

, W a n g s u b m i t t e d a M a r c h 2 0 0 7

a r t i c l e f r o m a n e w s p a p e r i n a d i f f e r e n t c o u n t y a n d t o w n i n F u j i a n

. T h e a r t i c l e

e x p l a i n s t h a t 2 0 0 7 i s t h e “ y e a r o f t h e ‘ g o l d e n p i g ’

, ” w h i c h t h e C h i n e s e v i e w a s a n

a u s p i c i o u s y e a r t o h a v e a c h i l d

. A c c o r d i n g t o t h e a r t i c l e

, p r o v i n c e s

, i n c l u d i n g

F u j i a n

, w e r e t i g h t e n i n g t h e i r f a m i l y p l a n n i n g p o l i c i e s i n a n t i c i p a t i o n o f a b a b y

b o o m

. T h e a r t i c l e n o t e d t h a t “ s e v e r a l t o w n s o p e n l y f o r c e t h e o v e r

- b i r t h p r e g n a n t

w o m e n t o u n d e r g o a b o r t i o n a n d s t e r i l i z a t i o n s ” a n d w o m e n w i t h t w o d a u g h t e r s a r e

a l s o s u b j e c t e d t o s t e r i l i z a t i o n

. T h e B I A f o u n d t h a t t h i s s t r i c t e r e n f o r c e m e n t w a s

l i m i t e d t o t h e y e a r 2 0 0 7 a n d “ n o t a p e r m a n e n t c h a n g e t o t h e p o p u l a t i o n c o n t r o l

p o l i c i e s o f t h e r e g i o n

. ” G i v e n t h e e n t i r e c o n t e x t o f t h e a r t i c l e

, t h i s f i n d i n g i s n o t

a r b i t r a r y o r c a p r i c i o u s

.

S e c o n d

, W a n g s u b m i t t e d a M a r c h 2 0 0 8 a f f i d a v i t f r o m h i s m o t h e r s t a t i n g t h a t

Citi ng opinions from other cir cuits, Wang a rg ues that the B I A could not re ject this 4

document solely

beca use it was unauthe nticated. See , e.g ., Z heng v. Gonzales, 500 F.3d 143 ( 2d

Cir. 2007). Even a ssuming ar g uendo that Wang is corre ct, the B I A did not rely solely upon the

lack of authentica tion.

6“ [ i ] n t h e p a s t y e a r

, t h e F a m i l y P l a n n i n g L a w w a s m o r e s t r i c t l y i m p l e m e n t e d i n o u r

h o m e t o w n ” a n d s t a t e d t h a t o n e w o m a n w a s f o r c e d t o u n d e r g o a s t e r i l i z a t i o n

o p e r a t i o n o n M a r c h 1 0

, 2 0 0 7

. T h e B I A f o u n d t h a t t h i s a f

f i d a v i t w a s

u n s u b s t a n t i a t e d a n d b a s e d o n a n e c d o t a l e v i d e n c e

. T h e a f f i d a v i t

, w h i l e m a k i n g a

g e n e r a l a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e f a m i l y p l a n n i n g p o l i c y w a s b e i n g m o r e s t r i c t l y e n f o r c e d

,

p r o v i d e d o n l y o n e e x a m p l e a n d o f f e r e d n o a d d i t i o n a l s u p p o r t o r c o r r o b o r a t i o n f o r

t h i s o p i n i o n

. W e c a n n o t s a y t h e B I A ’ s d e c i s i o n t o d i s c o u n t t h e a f f i d a v i t w a s 5

a r b i t r a r y o r c a p r i c i o u s

. 6

B e c a u s e W a n g f

a i l e d t o p r o v i d e m a t e r i a l

, p r e v i o u s l y u n a v a i l a b l e e v i d e n c e o f

c h a n g e d c o u n t r y c o n d i t i o n s s i n c e A u g u s t 3 1

, 2 0 0 6

, t h e B I A d i d n o t a b u s e i t s

d i s c r e t i o n i n d e n y i n g h i s m o t i o n t o r e o p e n

. 7

We do not read the BI

A’s ra tionale for disc ounting the a ffidavit as a cre dibilit y 5

deter mination. Rather, as we rea d the B I A’s ruling , the B I A g ave the aff idavit litt le weig ht

beca use it aver

red a conclusory

statement without offe ring sufficie nt support for it. As a g ener al

principle, it is well-settled that conc lusory , unsupported alleg ations in an aff idavit are not

sufficie ntly

probative to e stablish a fac t. See, e.g ., L eig h v. Warner B ros., I nc., 212 F .3d 1210,

1217 (11th Cir. 2000); L y nn v. United States, 365 F.3d 1225, 1238- 39 (11th Cir. 2004). Given

the problems with the re st of Wang’ s documentar y evidenc e, we cannot sa

y the B I A abuse d its

discretion whe n it concluded that this one a ffidavit wa s insufficient to ca rry Wang’ s heavy

burden to show a

n esca lation in force d sterilizations in his home vill ag e.

The B I A prope rly

conclude d that the birth of Wang ’s sec ond child did not provide a 6

basis for g ranting his moti on to reope n, as this constituted a cha ng e in per sonal circ umstances

not country

conditions. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)( 4)(i).

To the extent W ang

arg ues that he is prima f

acie elig ible for a sy lum and withholding of 7

remova l, we do not consider these c laims beca

use Wang failed to mee t the require ments for

g ranting his moti on to reope n. See Chen v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 565 F .3d 805, 810 (11th Cir. 2005)

(conc luding that a

n alien ca nnot file a succ essive asy lum application except as par t of a prope rly

filed motion to reopen)

. 7P E T I T I O N D E N I E D

.

8