2007 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 8-15-2007 

# Ji ang 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 . 06-1169

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_2007

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 2007 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 " Ji an g v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 587. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/587NOT 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. 06- 1169 J I ANQI NG J I ANG, Pet i t i oner

v. A TTO RN EY G EN ER A L O F TH E U N I TED STA TES,

R es pondent

__________________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof the B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( A gencyN o. A 96- 266- 375) Subm i t t ed underT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

on M ar ch 30, 2007 B efor e: FI SH E R , J O R D A N and R O T H , C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: A ugus t15, 2007)

OP I NI ON2

RO TH , C i r cui tJ udge: J i anqi ng J i ang, w ho i s a nat i ve and c i t i zen of the Peopl e’ s R epubl i c of Chi na, s eeks r evi ew of a f

i nal or derof the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( B I A ) , aff i r m i ng the deci s i on of an i m m i gr at i on j udge ( I J ) t o denyas y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and p rotec ti o n u n d er the C o n v en ti o n A g ains t T o rtu re (C A T ). Jian g ch all en g es th e B IA ’s or ders ol el yon t he gr ound t hats he i s ent i t l ed t o as y l um beca us e s he has a w el l - founded f e a ro f p e r s e c u t i o n u n d e rCh i n a ’ s f a mi l yp l a n n i n g p o l i c i e s . F o rth e r e a s o n s s e tf o r t h , we w i l l denyt he pet i t i on. J i ang ent er ed the U ni t ed St at es w i t houti ns pect i on on A pr i l 15, 2002, and appl i ed foras y l um and w i t hhol di ng of r emoval on M ar ch 1, 2003. A ccor di ng t o J i ang, s he w as ma r r i e d i n J a n u a r y1 9 8 9 , a n d h e rh u s b a n d c a me t o th e Un i t e d S t a t e s i n J u n e 1 9 8 9 . He w a s d e n ied a sy lu m b u t co n tin u e s to re m a in in th e c o u n try . Jia n q in g Jia n g g a v e b irth to heronl ychi l d on A pr i l 7, 1990. Subse quent l y , C hi nes e off i ci al s i ns t ruct ed hert o have a n in tra u ter in e d e v ice (IU D ) in se rte d ; sh e d id n o t d o so u n til 1 9 9 2 , w h e n it w a s n e c e ss a ryin o rde r fo r he r t o reg ist er h er so n ’s birth . In Ju n e 1 9 9 6 , sh e w as in stru cted to h av e a n ew er, m or e ef fec t i ve I U D i ns er t ed. She di d s o, butbegan e xper i enci ng pai n and w as i nform ed b ya d o c to r th a t sh e h a d tu m o rs in h e r u ter u s th a t w o u ld re q u ire a c o stlyo p e ra tio n to r emove. She had the I U D r emoved i n A ugus t1996 and ther eaf t ers t opped r epor t i ng for h e r q u a rt e rl yc h e c k u p s . In 1 9 9 7 , C h in e s e o f f ic ia ls is s u e d a n o tic e o f s te ri liz a tio n . A l t hough offi ci al s at t empt ed t o fi nd heratheri n- l aw s ’ hom e, theydi d notl ook forherat t he home of t he r el at i ve w i t h w hom s he w as s t ay i ng. J i ang w as nevers t er i l i zed. She3

s oughtt o come t o t he U ni t ed St at es w i t h a s m uggl er , and af t era fa i l ed att empt , ent er ed t he U ni t ed St at es on A pr i l 15, 2002. She has been r es i di ng i n Phi l adel phi a w i t h her h u sb an d , in the h o m e o f a loca l r estau ran teur. O n M ay28, 2003, J i anqi ng J i ang w as char ged as r emovabl e pur s uantt o § 2 3 7 (a)(1)(A ) of

the Im m igrati o n an d N ati o n ali tyA ct, 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 2 7 (a)(1)(A ). A fter a m er i t s hear i ng on J une 16, 2004, t he I J deni ed J i ang’ s r eques t s foras y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and pr ot ect i on undert he C A T . T he I J found s ever al keypart s of the t es t i m ony t o be i ncr edi bl e ori ncons i s t ent , ei t heri nt ernal l yorw i t h t he s uppor t i ng aff i davi t s . For i ns t ance , J i ang fi r s ts t at ed thats he r ece i ved hernot i ce of s t er i l i zat i on i n Sept ember1997, t hen l at ert es t i fi ed thats he r ece i ved i ti n M ar ch 1997. W hen conf r ont ed w i t h her p re v io u s te stim o n y , Jia n g c laim e d th a t sh e h a d n e v e r sta ted th a t sh e re c e iv e d th e n o tice in Sept ember . E ven af

t erhert es t i m onyw as pl ay ed bac k t o her , tw i ce, and the I J obs erved hert o be l i s t eni ng, J i ang mai nt ai ned thats he di d nots aySept ember . She cl ai m ed t o have n o t b e e n lis te n in g to th e ta p e s , th e IJ ’s o b s e rv a tio n s n o tw ith s ta n d in g . T hi s w as nott he onl yi ncons i s t encyorunl i kel ys t at ement . B oth J i ang and Y ong B i ng C hen, t he r es t aur ant eurw i t h w hom M r . and M r s . J i ang r es i ded, cl ai m ed nott o know t he name of the r es t aur antw her e M r . J i ang w or ked; the I J found thes e cl ai m s t o be i ncr edi bl e and l i kel yl i es t ol d t o pr ot ectM r . J i ang fr om depor t at i on. T he t es t i m onyw as al s o i ncons i s t entas t o t he l ength of t i m e forw hi ch J i anqi ng J i ang has been i n t he U ni t ed S tate s. It w a s a lso in c o n sis ten t w ith su p p o rtin g a f f id a v its re g a rd in g Jia n g ’s w h e re a b o u ts i n C hi na af

t ers he r ece i ved the s t er i l i zat i on not i ce a nd the t i m i ng of herfi r s tat t empt t o be4

sm ug gled i nto the U nit ed S t at es. T he I J deni ed J i ang as y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and pr ot ect i on underthe C A T . J i ang had ne verbeen f or ci bl ys t er i l i zed, and heracc ountof herhi s t oryunder C hi na’ s r epr oduct i ve pol i ci es w as s uppor t ed byno document aryevi dence . J i ang di d not ex p lai n w h ysh e c o u ld n o t pro d u ce an yrec o rds o f h er steri li za ti o n n o ti ce . M o reo v er, J i ang pr oduced no e vi dence bey ond hert es t i m onythati n C hi na s he w oul d nothave acc es s t o t r eatm entfort he ut er i ne pr obl ems thatw oul d notr enderhers t er i l e. T he B I A i s s ued a f

i nal r emoval or der , aff

i r m i ng w i t houtopi ni on the dec i s i on of t he I J . J i ang t i m el yappea l s . T he B I A had j ur i s di ct i on overJ i ang’ s appea l pur s uantt o 8 C . F. R . §§ 1003. 1( b) , 1003. 38, and 1240. 15. W e have j ur i s di ct i on overthe i ns t antpet i t i on fo r rev iew p u rsua n t t o 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 5 2 (a). If a n a lien w h o is o th e rw ise su b jec t to re m o v a l is d e e m e d to b e a re f u g e e , sh e w ill b e a llo w e d to re m a in in th e U n ite d S ta te s u n d e r a g ra n t o f a s y lu m . C hukw u v. A t t or ney G ener alof

U. S. , 484 F. 3d 185, 188 ( 3d C i r . 2001) . T he bur den of pr oof r es t s on t he a p p lica n t to d e m o n stra te th a t sh e is a re f u g e e . 8 C .F .R . § 1 2 0 8 .1 3 (a ). A re f u g e e is defi ned as s om eone w ho i s unabl e orunw i l l i ng t o r eturn hom e bec aus e of pe r s ecut i on or a w e ll-fo u n d e d f

e a r o f p e rse c u tio n . 8 U .S .C . § 1 1 0 1 (a )(4 2 )(A ). F o r a n a p p lica n t to est abli sh t hat s he h as a w el l -foun ded fear of pe rs ecuti on , she m ustshow that s he h olds a s ubj ect i ve fe arand thatt her e i s an obj ect i vel yr eas onabl e pos s i bi l i t ythats he w oul d s uffe r the p erse cu ti o n fe are d if sh e re turn ed to h er c o u n try . 8 C . F . R . § 1 2 0 8 . 1 3 (b)(2 )(I ). W h ere t he appl i cants eeks t o m ake thi s s how i ng thr ough t es t i m ony , the appl i cantcarr i es the1 Ji ang did, ho w ever, m anag e t o p roduce otherdo cum ents , such as regi strat i on pap ers . 1 5 b u rd e n o f

s u p p o rt in g h e r c la im th ro u g h te s tim o n yth a t is c re d ib le . See 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 . 1 3 (a). W here, as here, t he B IA has ado pted the findings of the I J, w e revi ew tho se f in d in g s u n d e r t h e s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e s ta n d a rd . D ia v . A sh c ro ft , 353 F. 3d 228, 249 ( 3d C i r. 20 03 ) ( en b anc). W e m ustup ho l d the factual fi nd i ng s of t he IJ as con cl usi ve “u nles s a n yre a s o n a b le a d

ju d ic a to r w o u ld b e c o m p e lle d to c o n c lu d e to th e c o n tr a ry.” 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 (b)(4 )(B ). A lth o u g h th e IJ d id n o t m a k e a n e x p licit a d v e rse c re d ib ili tyd e ter m in a tio n , h e d id e x p re s s h is c o n c e rn s w ith th e c re d ib ility o f te s tif y in g w itn e s s e s o n s e v e ra l o c c a s io n s . J i ang pr es ent ed no document aryevi dence t o s uppor thercl ai m thats he w as l i kel yt o be per s ecut ed upon herr etur n t o C hi na, s o t he t es t i m oni al evi dence w as al l thatthe I J had 1 b e f o re h im . W e c a n n o t sa yth a t an yre a so n a b le a d ju d ica to r w o u ld b e c o m p e lled to concl ude on the bas i s of J i ang’ s t es t i m onythats he w as ent i t l ed t o as y l um . J i ang w as nevers ubj ect ed t o a for ced s t er i l i zat i on; pr ovi ded i ncons i s t entacc ount s r egar di ng her r ece i ptof a s t er i l i zat i on not i ce, at t empt s t o ent erthe U ni t ed St at es , and means of avoi di ng s t er i l i zat i on i n C hi na; and r emai ned i n C hi na foroverfi ve y ear s aft erthe t i m e w hen s he s ay s s he r ece i ved the not i ce. M or eover , s he pr es ent ed no obj ect i ve evi dence r egar di ng t he ava i l abi l i t yi n C hi na of tr eatm entforherm edi cal condi t i on. G i ven the pauc i t yof r e l i a b l e e v i d e n c e , we c a n n o ts a yt h a tth e I J wa s c o mp e l l e d t o g r a n tJ i a n g a s y l u m.6

T he pet i t i on forr evi ew w i l l be deni ed .