FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT May 29, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 14290 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ A ge nc yN o. A 98- 564- 941 J I A N W U X U , P e titio n e r , v ersu s U .S . A T T O RN 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 on f orR e vi e w of

aD e c i s i on of

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls

_________________________ ( M ay 29, 2008) B efo re C A RN E S , B A R K E T T an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: J i a n W u X u, ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of C hi na , s e e ks r e vi e w of the I m m i gr a t i on2

J udge ’ s ( “ I J ” ) de ni a l of

hi s m ot i on t o r e ope n hi s r e m ova l pr oc e e di ngs ba s e d on a s e c o n d a s y lu m ap p lic a tio n . W h ile X u ’s o r ig in a l a s y lu m ap p lic a tio n r e lie d o n h is a l l e ge d pe r s e c ut i on i n C hi naba s e d on hi s a s s oc i a t i on w i th F a l on G ong, he now c l a i m s i n hi s m ot i on t o r e ope n tha the w oul d be pe r s e c ut e d i f r e m ove d t o C hi na b e c au s e h e h a s r e c e n tlyb e c o m e aC h r is tia n . T h e I Jru le d th a t X u ’s m o tio n to re op en, w hi ch X u fi l ed m ore than 9 0 d ay s a ft erhi s orderof re m ov al , w as no tt i m ebarr ed un der 8 C . F . R . § 1 00 3. 23 (b)( 1) becaus e he a l l eged changed ci rc um st ance s th a t m a te r ia llya f

f e c te d h is e lig ib ilityf

o ra s y lu m u n d e r8 U .S .C . § 1 1 5 8 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( D ) . N e ve rthe l e s s , the I Jde ni e d X u’ s m ot i on t o r e ope n, f i ndi ng tha tX u di d not d e m o n s tr a t e th a th e wa s e l i g i b l e f o ra s y l u m b e c au s e h e f

a i l e dt o s h o w in te ra lia tha t“ a l l C hr i s t i a ns ar e pe r s e c ut e d i n C hi na . ” X u a r gue s tha t , i n l i ghtof the si gn i fi cantam ou ntof evi dence he subm i tt ed i n sup po rtof hi s m ot i on , the IJabused hi s di s c r e t i on i n de ny i ng the m ot i on. W h e n , a s h e r e , th e B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ( “B I A ” ) “s u m m a r ily af fi rm s the IJ ’ s dec i si on w i tho utan op i ni on , the IJ ’ s dec i si on becom es the fi nal re m ov al order s ubj ec tt o revi ew . ” Se pulv e da v . U

. S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 401 F . 3d 1226, 12 30 (11th C i r. 20 05 ) ( per c uri am ). W e r evi ew the deni al of a m ot i on t o reopen f o ra n ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . A l iv . U

. S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 44 3 F . 3d 80 4, 80 8 (11 th C i r. 20 06 ) ( per c uri am ) ( addres si ng the B IA ’ s deni al of a m ot i on t o reopen u nd er8 C . F . R . § 1 00 3. 2). T hi s r evi ew “ i s l i m i t ed t o d et erm i ni ng w hether there has bee n an3

exer ci se of adm i ni stra t i ve di sc re t i on and w hether the m att erof exer ci se has bee n arbi traryor capri ci ou s. ” I d. (i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). A n a lie n m a y f

ile am o tio n to r e o p e n h is r e m o v a l o r d e rw ith th e I J . I m m ig r a tio n a n dN a tio n a lityA c t ( “I N A ” ) § 2 4 0 ( c ) ( 7 ) , 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 2 9 a ( c ) ( 7 ) ; 8 C . F . R . § 1 00 3. 23 (b)( 3). M ot i on s t o reopen m aybe grant ed i f there i s new evi dence thati s m at er i al and w as no tavai l abl e and coul d n othave been di sc ov er ed o rp r e s e n te d a t th e r e m o v a l h e a r in g . See 8 C . F . R . §§ 1003. 2( c ) ( 1) a nd 1 0 0 3 .2 3 ( b ) ( 3 ) ; s e e al

s o A bdiv . U

. S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 43 0 F . 3d 11 48 , 11 49 (11th C i r. 2005) ( pe rc ur i a m ) . A m ot i on t o r e ope n i s , how e ve r , di s f a vor e d, e s pe c i a l l yi n a r e m ova l pr oc e e di ng “ w he r e , a s age ne r a l m a tt e r , e ve ryde l a yw orks t o the advant age of the depo rt abl e a l i en w ho w i shes m er el y t o rem ai n i n the U ni t ed S t at es . ” I

.N .S. v . D o h e r ty , 502 U . S . 314, 323, 112 S . C t . 719, 724- 25, 116 L . E d. 2d 82 3 (19 92 ). T he m ov anthas the “ heavy burden” of prese nt i ng evi dence w hi ch w o u ld lik e lyc h a n g e th e r e s u lt in th e c a s e . A li , 4 4 3 F .3 d a t 8 1 3 . A m o tio n to r e ope n “ s ha l l s t a t e the ne w f a c t s tha tw i l l be pr ove n a tahe a r i ng t o be he l d i f the m ot i on i s grant ed, and shal l be supp ort ed by af fi davi t s or other e vi dent i ary m a te r ia l.” I N A § 2 4 0 ( c ) ( 7 ) ( B ) , 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 2 9 a ( c ) ( 7 ) ( B ) ; V e r ano- V e las c o v . U

. S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 4 5 6 F . 3 d 1 3 7 2 , 1 3 7 6 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 6 ) (p er cu ri am ). T h e IJ m ay d en y a m ot i on t o reopen i f the m ov anthas notes t abl i shed a pri m a f aci e c a s e f

orthe u n d e r ly in g s u b s ta n tiv e r e lie f s o u g h t. I

. N . S. v . A budu , 4 8 5 U .S . 9 4 , 1 0 4 , 1 0 8 S . C t.4

9 0 4 , 9 1 2 , 9 9 L . E d . 2 d 9 0 ( 1 9 8 8 ) ( a d d r e s s in g th e B I A ’s d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n ) . T o qua l i f y f orw i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l unde rthe I N A , a n a l i e n m us ts how tha ti f r e turne d t o hi s c ountry , the a l i e n’ s l i f e orf r e e dom w oul d be thr e a t e ne d on a c c ountof

r a c e , r e l i gi on, na t i ona l i ty , m e m be r s hi p i n apa rt i c ul a rs oc i a l gr oup, or pol i t i c a l opi ni on. I N A § 241( b) ( 3) , 8 U . S . C . § 1231( b) ( 3) . “ A n a l i e n be a r s the bur de n of

de m ons tr a t i ng tha the m or e - l i ke l y - tha n- notw oul d be pe r s e c ut e d or t ortured up on hi s r eturn t o the coun tryi n q uest i on . ” Me ndoz a v . U . S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 327 F . 3d 1283, 1287 ( 11th C i r . 2003) . T o be e nt i t l e d t o r e l i e f unde rthe C on vent i on A gai nstT orture, an appl i cantm ustes t abl i sh thati ti s “ m ore l i kel y than nottha the ors he w oul d be t ortur e d i f r e m ove d t o the pr opos e d c ountryof re m ov al . ” 8 C . F . R . § 2 08 . 16 (c )( 2). T h e I Jab u s e d h is d is c r e tio n in th is c a s e w h e n h e d e n ie d X u ’s m o tio n to reo p en h i s rem o v al p ro ceed i n g s. In p art i cu l ar, b y st at i n g th at , “ [t ] o g ran t[X u ’ s] m o tio n th e C o u rt w o u ld h a v e to a c c e p t th e f a c t th a t a ll C h r is tia n s a r e p e r s e c u te d in C hi na, ” the IJabused hi s di sc re t i on by i m po si ng a hi gh erst andard than X u n ee ded t o m ee tt o m ake outa p r im a fa c ie c a s e th a t h e w a s e n title d to r e lie f . See 8 U . S. C. § 1231( b) ( 3) ; 8 C . F . R . § 208. 16( c ) ( 2) . A c c or di ngl y , w e gr a ntthe pe t i t i on f or r e vi e w , va c a t e the I J ’ s de ni a l of X u’ s m ot i on t o r e ope n, a nd r e m a nd the c a s e f orIn additi on , th eIJ may re -examinewh e ther Xu’ s mo tio n tore op en w a s time -b arre d in 1 light of InreC- W

-L - , 24 I . & N . Dec . 346, 350-51 (B IA 2007). 5 the I Jt o c ons i de rX u’ s m ot i on t o r e ope n unde rthe c orr e c tl e ga l s t a nda r d. 1 P E T I T I ON GR AN T E D A ND CA S E RE MAND E D.