11-1604-ag

Lin v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER

FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF

APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER

IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN

ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY

ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals

2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan

3 United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of

New York, on the 2nd 4 day of August, two thousand twelve.

5

6 PRESENT:

7 DENNIS JACOBS,

8 Chief Judge,

9 JON O. NEWMAN,

10 PIERRE N. LEVAL,

11 Circuit Judges. 

12 _______________________________________

13

14 XIAO JIE ZHOU v. HOLDER, 10-1350-ag

15 A093 394 030 

16 _______________________________________

17

18 SHAO LIN CHEN v. HOLDER, 10-2911-ag

19 A099 938 936

20 _______________________________________

21

22 WEN QING YANG v. HOLDER, 10-3684-ag

23 A099 930 548

24 _______________________________________

25

26 DIANQIN JIANG v. HOLDER, 10-4919-ag

27 A089 253 646

28 _______________________________________

04302012-1-10
1

2 SHUYING CHEN v. HOLDER, 11-13-ag

3 A095 164 157

4 _______________________________________

5 

6 WEN QING CHEN v. HOLDER, 11-1015-ag

7 A099 928 261

8 _______________________________________

9

10 SHU-CHIN LIN v. HOLDER, 11-1604-ag

11 A073 034 379

12 _______________________________________

13

14 ZOU-QIANG GAO v. HOLDER, 11-2062-ag

15 A072 460 888

16 _______________________________________

17 

18 MING KUI XIAO v. HOLDER, 11-2303-ag

19 A072 766 265

20 _______________________________________

21

22 FENG ZHI LIN v. HOLDER, 11-2572-ag

23 A089 254 238

24 _______________________________________

25

26 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of these petitions for review of

27 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decisions, it is hereby

28 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petitions for review

29 are DENIED. 

30 Each of these petitions challenges a decision of the

31 BIA affirming the decision of an immigration judge (“IJ”)

32 denying asylum and related relief. The applicable standards

33 of review are well-established. See Jian Hui Shao v.

34 Mukasey, 546 F.3d 138, 157-58 (2d Cir. 2008). 

04302012-1-10 2
1

2 Petitioners, all natives and citizens of China, sought

3 relief from removal based on their claims that they fear

4 persecution because they have had one or more children in

5 the United States, which they contend is in violation of

6 China’s population control program. For largely the same

7 reasons as this Court set forth in Jian Hui Shao, we find no

8 error in the agency’s decisions. See id. at 158-72.

9 We also conclude that the agency did not abuse its

10 discretion when, in certain cases, it declined to credit

11 letters from a few individuals who claimed that they had

12 been required to undergo sterilization because (i) the

13 letters were unauthenticated, (ii) Petitioners failed to

14 demonstrate that the circumstances of the authors were

15 similar to their own, and (iii) the agency in other cases

16 has rejected such isolated reports of forced sterilization

17 in light of significant country evidence to the contrary.

18 See, e.g., Mao Hui Dong, No. A099 934 664 (B.I.A. Feb. 9,

19 2011); see also Jian Hui Shao, 546 F.3d at 153, 159-61, 172. 

20 For the foregoing reasons, these petitions for review

21 are DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of

22 removal that the Court previously granted in these petitions

04302012-1-10 3
1 is VACATED, and any pending motion for a stay of removal in

2 these petitions is DISMISSED as moot. Any pending request

3 for oral argument in these petitions is DENIED in accordance

4 with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2), and

5 Second Circuit Local Rule 34.1(b).

6 FOR THE COURT: 

7 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk

8

9

04302012-1-10 4