2007 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

12-19-2007

Chen v. Atty Gen USA

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 06-3362

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2007 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Chen v. Atty Gen USA" (2007). 2007 Decisions. Paper 35.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007/35
 *

 Honorable Louis H. Pollak, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

 

No. 06-3362

 

CHANG RUI CHEN,

Petitioner

v.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,

Respondent

 

On Petition for Review of an Order of

The Board of Immigration Appeals

Immigration Judge: Honorable Annie S. Garcy

(No. A78-858-687)

 

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

December 13, 2007

Before: SLOVITER and AMBRO, Circuit Judges

POLLAK,* District Judge

(Opinion filed: December 19, 2007)

 

OPINION

 

AMBRO, Circuit Judge
 1 Although the administrative record refers to the petitioner as Chuanrui Chen and

Chuan Rui Chen, the petition for review refers to him as Chang Rui Chen, and his current

counsel assures us that “Chang Rui Chen” is correct. 

 2 We review the IJ’s decision because, having been adopted without opinion by the

BIA, it has become the final agency determination. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(4). We

review the IJ’s factual findings under a “substantial evidence” standard (that is, whether

substantial evidence supports the finding). Cao v. Attorney Gen. of the U.S., 407 F.3d

146, 152 (3d Cir. 2005) (“The credibility determination, like all IJ factual findings, is

subject to substantial evidence review.”)

2

Chang Rui Chen1 petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’

decision that, without opinion, affirmed the Immigration Judge’s denial of asylum,

withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture.2

 Chen, who

claims that he would be persecuted and/or tortured in China on account of China’s

coercive population control program, argues that the IJ erred in finding him not to be

credible, and further argues that he has proven past persecution in the form of his wife’s

forced sterilization. 

The IJ’s adverse credibility finding and denial of relief, however, are supported by

substantial evidence. In particular, numerous material inconsistencies exist as to the

adverse credibility finding. For instance, Chen testified that the Chinese government did

not discover that he had a second child until his wife’s parents’ house caught fire in 2001,

but in fact the record shows that the government had already learned Chen had a second

child in May 2000. Moreover, Chen was inconsistent as to when his wife was sterilized. 

These inconsistencies, combined with other problems with Chen’s evidence of past and
3

future persecution, suffice to support the IJ’s decision. 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.