2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-3-2009 

# Liu v . Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-3047

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " L iu v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 157. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/1571 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 08- 3047

___________ YAN L I U, Pet i t i oner vs. ATTO RN EY G ENER AL O F THE UN I TED STATES

____________________________________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp eal s Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e : H o n o ra b le H e n ryS . D o g in

( A gencyN o. A 98- 560- 869)

____________________________________ Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

N ovember27, 2009 B efor e: C hi ef J udge SC I R I C A , SM I T H and W E I S, C i r cui tJ udges

(O p inion fil ed : D ec em b er 3 , 2 0 0 9 )

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C U R I A M.

Pet i t i onerY an Li u i s a nat i ve and c i t i zen of C hi na w ho ent er ed the U ni t ed St at es i n M ar ch 2005. L i u w as s erved w i t h a N ot i ce t o A ppearchar gi ng herw i t h bei ng su b ject t o rem o v al pu rsua n t t o Im m igrati o n an d N ati o n ali tyA ct § 2 1 2 (a)(7)(A )(I ).2 I n J anuary2006, L i u appl i ed foras y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and r el i ef undert he C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e ( C A T ) . I n s uppor tof herappl i cat i on, L i u al l eged t hats he l eftC hi na bec aus e tw o m en att empt ed t o r ape he rand t ook pi ctur es of her w i t houthert op on. L i u’ s fatherw as appar ent l yabl e t o i nt ervene i n t he att ack, butw as t hen as s aul t ed hi m s el f fora per i od of fi ft een mi nut es . L i u fur t heral l eged thatw hen s he r epor t ed the att ack t o t he pol i ce, t heydi d noti nves t i gat e hercas e. She cont ends t hats he hear d t hatone of the as s ai l ant s had a r el at i ve i n t he pol i ce de par t m ent . She cont ends t hat aft ert he att ack, herat t acke r s s enthera thr eat eni ng l et t er . T heyal s o appr oache d heron a bus and thr eat ened he ragai n. L i u t es t i fi ed thatt heypos t ed nake d pi ctur es of herather s chool . A ppr oxi m at el yt en mont hs aft ert he as s aul t , L i u depart ed C hi na fort he U ni t ed St at es . T he I m m i gr at i on J udge ( “I J ”) deni ed Li u’ s appl i cat i ons forr el i ef, concl udi ng t hats he di d notqual i fyforas y l um beca us e s he w as t he vi ct i m of an a t t ack by cr i m i nal s and had notbeen t ar get ed on ac countof a pr ot ect ed gr ound. T he I J r eas oned t hati tw as “expa ndi ng t he as y l um l aw a l i t t l e t oo far ” t o i ncl ude eve r yw om an w ho had been the vi ct i m of an a t t empt ed r ape orhum i l i at i ng phot ogr aphs by“cr i m i nal s . ” ( A . R . at 52. ) T he I J s t at ed thathe di d notfi nd L i u’ s at t empt t o qual i fyforas y l um on t he gr ound that o n e o f h er a tt ac k ers h ad “so m e c o n n ec ti o n ” to th e p o li ce “p ersu asiv e.” (Id.) Speci fi cal l y , t he I J found thathert es t i m onyw as i ncons i s t entconce r ni ng w hen s he knew t hatt he as s ai l ant“A h H u” w as connec t ed t o t he pol i ce. L i u appea l ed t o t he B oar d of Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls (“ B IA ” ). T h e B IA a f f irm e d , ag re e in g w ith th e IJ th a t, ev e n if L iu3

w er e dee m ed cr edi bl e, s he fa i l ed t o s us t ai n herbur den of pr oof appl i cabl e t o as y l um and t he more s t r i ngentbur den appl i cabl e t o w i thhol di ng of r emoval . T he B I A concl uded that t he al l eged i nci dent s di d notr i s e t o t he l evel of per s ecut i on on acc ountof a pr ot ect ed gr ound and thatt he r ecor d di d nots uppor thercl ai m t hats he has a w el l - founded f earof p e rs e c u tio n . T h e B IA a ls o re je c te d L iu ’s c la im f

o r r e lie f u n d e r t h e C A T . L i u fi l ed a t i m el ypet i t i on forr evi ew i n t he Second Ci r cui t . T he pet i t i on w as t r ans ferr ed t o t hi s C i r cui t . W e have j ur i s di ct i on overherpet i t i on pur s uantt o 8 U . S. C . § 1252( a) . W e uphol d t he B I A ’ s det erm i nat i ons i f theyar e s uppor t ed by re a s o n a b le , s u b s ta n tia l a n d p ro b a tiv e e v id e n c e o n th e re c o rd c o n s id e re d a s a w h o le . Y us upov v. A t t ’ yG en. , 518 F. 3d 185, 197 ( 3d C i r . 2008) . U ndert he s ubs t ant i al evi dence st and ard, “t he B IA ’s fi nd i ng m ustbe u ph el d u nles s the ev i den ce no ton l ysupp ort s a co n tr aryco n clus ion , b u t com p els i t. ” A b d il le v. A sh cro ft, 2 4 2 F . 3 d 4 7 7 , 4 8 3 -84 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) (cit ing IN S v . E li as-Z ac arias, 50 2 U . S . 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 n . 1 (19 9 2 )).

T o b e g ra n ted a sy lu m , L iu m u st s h o w th a t sh e is “ u n a b le o r u n w ill in g to r etur n t o [C hi na] . . . beca us e of pe r s ecut i on ora w el l - founded f earof per s ecut i on on acc ountof r ace , r el i gi on, nat i onal i t y , m ember s hi p i n a part i cul ars oci al gr oup, orpol i t i cal o p in io n .” 8 U .S .C . § 1 1 0 1 (a )(4 2 )(A ); se e a lso 8 U .S .C . § 1 1 5 8 (b )(1 )(A ). T o b e e lig ib le f o rw i t h h o l d i n g o f

r e m o v a l , L i u m u s td e m o n s t r a t e t h a t“ t h e r e i s a g r e a t e r - t h a n - f i f t yp e rc e n t c h a n c e o f

p e rs e c u tio n ” in C h in a b a s e d o n o n e o f th e s e p ro te c te d g ro u n d s . S e n a th ir a ja h v . IN S , 1 5 7 F .3 d 2 1 0 , 2 1 5 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 8 ); s e e a ls o 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 3 1 (b )( 3 )( C ).Forr el i ef unde rt he C A T , L i u m us tdemonstr at e thati ti s m or e l i kel yt han nott hats he

w o u ld b e to rt u re d if

re m o v e d to C h in a . S e e 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 6 (c )( 2 ). L iu a rg u e s th a t th e B IA e rre d w h e n it rea so n e d th a t th e “ a lleg e d in c id e n ts d o n o t r ise t o the lev el of p erse cu ti o n o n ac co u n t of a p rotec ted g rou n d . ” (A . R . at 2.) L i u, how ever , has offe r ed no ar gum ent s t hatw oul d underm i ne thi s concl us i on. She ar gues onl yt hatt he fa ct s of the ca s e ar e “unc l ear ” as t o w hethers he w as at t acke d bas ed o n a p ro tec ted g ro u n d . (A p p e llan t’s B r. 1 4 -1 5 .) S h e m a k e s s im ilar a rg u m e n ts w ith r egar d t o herw el l - founded f earof futur e per s ecut i on and w hethers he bel ongs t o a p arti cu lar soc ial g rou p . (Id. at 16 , 1 7 . ) If the fa cts are u n clea r, h o w ev er, th e IJ a n d B IA pr oper l ydeni ed herpet i t i on as i ti s herbur den t o es t abl i s h el i gi bi l i t yforr el i ef. See L ukw ago v. A s hcr oft , 329 F. 3d 157, 170 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( appl i canthas bur den of s how i ng t h a tt h e p e r s e c u t i o n w a s o n a c c o u n to f t h e a p p l i c a n t ’ s r a c e , r e l i g i o n , n a t i o n a l i t y, m e m b e rs h ip in a p a rt ic u la r s o c ia l g ro u p , o r p o litic a l o p in io n ).

M o re o v e r, as id e f

ro m p o in tin g to g e n e ra l co u n tryc o n d iti o n s in C h in a , L iu di d notpr oduce e vi dence t hati ti s m or e l i kel yt han nott hats he w oul d be t or tur ed byorat t he ac qui es cenc e of Chi nes e off i ci al s i f s he r etur ned t o C hi na. T her efor e, s he i s not eli g ible fo r pro tecti o n u n d er the C A T . P ierre v. A tt ’yG en . , 5 2 8 F . 3 d 1 8 0 , 1 8 6 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ( e n b a n c ).

F o r t h e f o re g o in g re a s o n s , w e w ill d e n yh e r p e titio n f o r r e v ie w . 

### 4