FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT D e c e m be r 1, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ 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. 05- 11163 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ B I A A g e n c yN o s . A 95- 895- 534 A 95- 895- 535 F E N G Z H U L U I , C H A N G R O N G L U I , P e titio n e r s , 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

_________________________ ( D e c e m be r1, 2005) B efo re D U B IN A , M A R C U S an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

F eng Z hu L ui (“ F eng”), and h erhu sband, C hang R on g L ui (“ C hang ”) ( c ol l e c t i ve l yr e f

e rr e d t o a s “ P e t i t i one r s ” ) , pr oc e e di ng p ro se , s e e k r e vi e w of the B oa r d of I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ’ ( “ B I A ’ s ” ) de c i s i on a f f i rm i ng the i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s ( “ I J ’ s ” ) or de rde ny i ng the i rappl i c a t i on f ora s y l um a nd w i thhol di ng of re m ov al un der the Im m i grat i on and N at i on al i ty A ct(“ IN A ”) and the U ni t ed N a t i ons C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e a nd O the rC rue l , I nhum a n, orD e gr a di ng T r e a tm e n t o rP u n is h m e n t ( “C A T r e lie f ” ) . O n ap p e a l, th e P e titio n e r s a r g u e th a t if th e y a r e r e tu rn e d to C h in ath e yw ill b e f o r c ib lys te r iliz e d u n d e rth e C h in e s e f a m ily pl a nni ng pol i c ybe c aus e the yha ve thr e e c hi l dr e n. T he yc ont e nd tha tthe yw i l l be s u b je c te d to h ig h f

in e s , d e te n tio n , to rtu r e , f o r c e d h a r d lab o r , a n d im p r is o n m e n t. T hey a ss ertthatthey w i l l be t ortured up on re turn t o C hi na because they l ef t i l l egal l y. T hey c l ai m pastpers ec ut i on and a w el l -f ou nd ed fe arof future pers ec ut i on base d o n F eng’ s f orce d abo rt i on i n C hi na. In re spon se , the A tt orney G e ne r a l a r gue s tha tw e l a c k j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w the B I A ’ s de c i s i on f i ndi ng the a s y lu m ap p lic a tio n u n tim e ly . I. W e a r e “o b lig a te d to in q u ir e in to s u b je c t- m a tte rju r is d ic tio n s u as p o n te w henever i tm aybe l ac ki ng . ” Cadet v. B ul ger , 37 7 F . 3d 11 73 , 11 79 (11th C i r. 2004) ( c i t a t i ons a nd quot a t i on m a rks om i tt e d) . A n a s y l um appl i c a t i on m us tbe

“ f i l e d wi th i n 1 y e a ra f

t e rth e d a t e o f

th e a l i e n ’ s a rr i v a l i n th e Un i t e d S t a t e s . ” I NA3

§ 208( a ) ( 2) ( B ) ; 8 U . S . C . § 1158( a ) ( 2) ( B ) . A n unt i m e l yappl i c a t i on “ m a ybe consi dere d . . . i f the al i en dem on stra t es . . . ei ther the exi st ence of changed c i r c um s t a nc e s w hi c h m a t e r i a l l ya f f e c tthe appl i c a nt ’ s e l i gi bi l i tyf ora s y l um or extra ordi naryci rc um st ance s r el at i ng t o the del ayi n fi l i ng an appl i ca t i on . . . . ” 8 U . S . C . § 1158( a ) ( 2) ( D ) . T he de t e rm i na t i on of w he the ra n a l i e n c a n appl yf or a s y lu m , h o w e v e r , is le f

t e x c lu s iv e lyto th e A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, a n d “[ n ]o c o u rt s h a ll ha ve j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w a nyde t e rm i na t i on of the A tt orne yG e ne r a l ” r e ga r di ng the t i m e l i ne s s of

the a s y l um appl i c a t i on. 8 U . S . C . § 1158( a ) ( 3) . S e c t i on 10 6(a) (1)( A )( i i i ) of the R E A L ID A ctam ends 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2 b y a dd i ng a new p r o v is io n , § 1 2 5 2 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( D ) , w h ic h p r o v id e s in p e rtin e n t p a rt: ( D ) J U D I C I A L R E V I E W O F C E R T A I N L E G A L C L A I M S . - - N oth i ng i n sub para graph (B ) or ( C ), or in an y o th erprov i si on of thi s A ct(other tha n thi s s e c t i o n ) w hi c h l i m i t s ore l i m i na t e s j udi c i a l r e vi e w , s ha l l be c ons true d a s pr e c l udi ng r e vi e w of c ons t i tut i ona l c l a i m s orque s t i ons of law ra is ed up on a pet i t i on for r evi ew fi l ed w i th an app ropri at e c ou rt o f ap p e a ls in a c c o r d a n c e w ith th is s e c tio n . R E A L I D A c t o f

2 0 0 5 , P u b . L . N o . 1 0 9 - 1 3 , § 1 0 6 ( a ) , 1 1 9 S ta t. 2 3 1 , 3 1 0 . W e h a v e r e c e n tlyh e ld th a t “[ t]h e tim e lin e s s o f a n a s y lu m ap p lic a tio n is n o t a c o n s titu tio n a l c la im o rq u e s tio n o f la w c o v e r e d b yth e R e a l I D A c t’s c h a n g e s .” Chac on- B ote r o v . U

. S. A t t ’ yG e n. , N o. 04 -164 22 , m anuscr i ptop . at8 (11 th C i r. O ct . 6, 20 05 ). S ec t i on 11 58 (a )( 3) st i l l “ di vest s our C ou rtof j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew4

ade c i s i on r e ga r di ng w he the ra n a l i e n c om pl i e d w i th the one - y e a rt i m e l i m i tor es t abl i shed extra ordi naryci rc um st ance s thatw ou l d excuse hi s unt i m el y f i l i ng . ” I d. A f te rr e v ie w in g th e r e c o r d , w e c o n c lu d e th a t w e d o n o t h a v e ju r is d ic tio n to r e vi e w the B I A ’ s de c i s i on r e ga r di ng w he the rthe P e t i t i one r s c om pl i e d w i th the o n e-year ti m e l i m i to r est ab l i sh ed ex trao rd i n ary ci rcu m st an ces th atw o u l d ex cu se th e i ru n t i me l yf

i l i n g . A c c o r d i n g l y , w e d i s mi s s th e p e t i t i o n a s t o a n ya s y l u m c l a i m. II . W he n the B I A i s s ue s ade c i s i on, w e r e vi e w onl ytha tde c i s i on, e xc e ptt o the e x te n t th a t th e B I A e x p r e s s lya d o p ts th e I J ’s d e c is io n . A l N a jja rv . A s h c r o

ft , 257 F .3 d 1 2 6 2 , 1 2 8 4 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) . B e c au s e th e B I A is s u e d its o w n d e c is io n in th is ca se , w e r evi ew the B IA ’ s dec i si on . T o the ext entthatthe B IA ’ s dec i si on w as b ased o n a l eg al d et erm i n at i o n , rev i ew i s de no vo . Mo h a m m e d v . A s h c r o

ft , 261 F . 3d 12 44 , 12 47 -48 (11 th C i r. 20 01 ). T he B IA ’ s f ac tual det erm i nat i on s are re v iew ed u n d erth e s u b stan ti al-e v id en ce test, an d w e “m u st af firm th e B IA ’s de c i s i on i f

i ti s ‘ s upport e d byr e a s onabl e , s ubs t a nt i a l , a nd pr oba t i ve e vi de nc e on the re cord consi dere d as aw ho l e. ’ ” A l N aj j ar , 257 F . 3d a t1283- 84 ( c i t a t i on om i tt ed). T he subst ant i al evi dence t es ti s “ defe re nt i al ” and do es no tal l ow “ re w ei gh [i ng ] the evi dence fr om sc ra t ch. ” M az ar i egos v . U

. S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 241 F . 3d 13 20 , 13 23 (11th C i r. 20 01 ). “ T o rever se the IJ ’ s f ac tfi nd i ng s, w e m ustfi nd that5

the re cord no ton l y s up po rt s r ever sa l , bu tcom pel s i t . ” Me ndoz a v . U . S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 32 7 F . 3d 12 83 , 12 87 (11th C i r. 20 03 ) ( consi deri ng w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al cl ai m ). T o qua l i f yf 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 ti s m or e l i ke l ytha n nottha ti f r e turne d t o hi s orhe rc ountry , the a l i e n’ s l i f e or f r e e d o m w o u ld b e th r e a te n e d o n a c c o u n t o f r a c e , r e lig io n , n a tio n a lity , m e m b e r s h ip i n ap a rt i c u l a rs o c i a l g r o u p , o rp o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n . I N A § 2 4 1 ( b ) ( 3 ) ; 8 U . S. C. § 1 2 3 1 (b )(3 ). “ A n al i en b ears th e b u rd en o f d em o n strat i n g th ath e m o re-l i k el yth a n - n o t w o u ld b e p e r s e c u te d o rto rtu r e d u p o n h is r e tu rn to th e c o u n tryin qu es t i on . ” Men do za , 327 F . 3d a t1287. A n a l i e n m us tde m ons tr a t e s om e ne xus betw ee n the al l eged perse cut i on or fe arof pers ec ut i on and o ne of the fi ve prot ec t ed g r o u n d s . See P e r le r a- Es c obarv . E x e c ut i v e O

f f i c e f orI m m i gr at i on , 894 F . 2d 1292, 12 97 (11th C i r. 19 90 ) ( “ E ven a cl ear probabi l i ty thatan al i en’ s l i fe i s threa t ened w ith o u t a n yin d ic a tio n th a t th e b a s is o f th e th r e a t is r e la te d to as ta tu to r ily e n u m e r a te d g r o u n d is in s u f f ic ie n t to e s tab lis h e lig ib ilityf o rr e lie f .” ) . A n a lie n w h o h a s n o t s h o w n p a s t p e r s e c u tio n m a ys till b e e n title d to w i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l i f

he c a n de m ons tr a t e af

utur e thr e a tt o hi s l i f

e orf r e e dom on apr ot e c t e d gr ound i n hi s c ountry . 8 C . F . R . § 208. 16( b) ( 2) . T o e s t abl i s h a

“ w e l l - f ounde d f e a r , ” “ a n appl i c a ntm us tde m ons tr a t e tha thi s orhe rf e a rof pers ec ut i on i s s ubj ec t i vel y genui ne and o bj ec t i vel y r ea sonabl e. ” A l N aj j ar , 257 F .3 d a t 1 2 8 9 ( d is c u s s in g w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a ra s it ap p lie s to a s y lu m ) .6

T o obt a i n w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l unde rthe C A T ’ s i m pl e m e nt i ng re gu l at i on s, an al i en m ustes t abl i sh thathe “ m ore l i kel y than n ot ” w i l l be t ortured up on hi s r eturn t o h i s hom e c ou ntry . 8 C . F . R . § 2 08 . 16 (c )( 2). “ T orture” i s def i ned as a n y a c t b yw h ic h s e v e r e p a in o rs u f f e r in g , w h e th e rp h y s ic a l o rm e n ta l, i s i nt e nt i ona l l y i nf

l i c t e d on a pe r s on f

or s uc h purpos e s as o bt a i ni ng f r om hi m orhe rorathi r d pe r s on i n fo rm at i o n orac onf e s s i on, pu ni shi ng hi m o r he r f or a n a c t he or s he or a thi r d pe r s on has c om m i tt e d ori s s us pe c t e d of ha vi n g co m m i tt e d, ori nt i m i da t i ng or c oe r c i ng hi m orhe rorathi r d pe r s on , o rf ora nyr e a s on ba s e d on di s c r i m i n at i on of

a nyki nd, w he n s uc h pa i n ors uf f e r i ng i s i nf

l i c t e d by o ra t th e in s tig a tio n o f

o rw ith th e c o n s e n t o ra c q u ie s c e n c e o f ap u b lic o f f ic ia l o ro th e rp e r s o n a c tin g in a n o f f ic ia l c ap a c ity . I d. § 2 0 8 .1 8 ( a ) ( 1 ) . U nc orr obor a t e d butc r e di bl e t e s t i m ony f r om the appl i c a ntm a ybe s uf f i c i e nt a l o n e t o s u s t a i n th e b u r d e n o f p r o o f f o rw i th h o l d i n g o f

r e mo v a l . 8 C. F. R. § 2 08 . 16 (b). T he w ea ker the appl i cant ’ s t es t i m on y, ho w ever , the great erthe need f o rc o rr o b o r a tiv e e v id e n c e . Y ang v . U . S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 4 1 8 F .3 d 1 1 9 8 , 1 2 0 1 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2005) . T he B I A ’ s c r e di bi l i tyde t e rm i na t i ons a r e a l s o r e vi e w e d unde rthe s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e te s t. D -Muhum e d v . U . S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 3 8 8 F .3 d 8 1 4 , 8 1 8 ( 1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ). T h e B IA m u stp ro v i d e “ sp eci fi c, co g en treaso n s” fo r i t s ad v erse c r e d ib ilityf

in d in g , a n d th o s e r e a s o n s m u s t b e s u p p o rte d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . For gue v . U . S. A t t ’ yG e n. , 40 1 F . 3d 12 82 , 12 87 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). A l tho ug h “ an advers e c re di bi l i ty det erm i nat i on do es no tal l evi at e the IJ ’ s duty t o con si der other7

e vi de nc e pr oduc e d bya n a s y l um appl i c a nt [ , ] . . . [ i ] f the appl i c a ntpr oduc e s no e vi de nc e othe rtha n hi s t e s t i m ony , a n a dve r s e c r e di bi l i tyde t e rm i na t i on i s a l one suff i ci entt o sup po rtthe deni al of an as yl um appl i ca t i on . ” I d. “ I f , how e ve r , the appl i cantprod uces other e vi dence of pers ec ut i on , w hat everform i tm ayt ake, the IJ m ustconsi der thatevi dence, and i ti s notsuff i ci entfor the IJt o rel y s ol el y on an advers e c re di bi l i ty det erm i nat i on i n tho se i nst ance s. ” I d. “ O n ce an ad v erse cr ed ib il ity f

in d in g is m ad e, th e b u rd en is o n th e ap p li ca n t ali en to sh o w th at th e I J’s c r e di bi l i tyde c i s i on w a s nots upport e d by‘ s pe c i f i c , c oge ntr e a s ons ’ orw a s not base d o n sub st ant i al evi dence. ” I d. H o w ev er, an ad v erse cred i b i l i ty fi n d i n g m u st g o t o th e h earto f th e cl ai m , an d n o tb e b ased o n m i n o r d i screp an ci es, in c o n s is te n c ie s , a n d o m is s io n s . See G a o v . A s h c r o ft , 29 9 F . 3d 26 6, 27 2 (3rd C i r. 2 0 0 2 ) ; Aki n m a de v . I

NS , 19 6 F . 3d 95 1, 95 4 (9th C i r. 19 99 ). A si ng l e i ncon si st ency m a yb e s u f

f ic ie n t to s u s ta in a n a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityf in d in g if th e in c o n s is te n c yis r e l a t e d t o th e a l i e n ’ s b a s i s f o rh e rf e a ra n d g o e s t o th e h e a rto f h e ra s y l u m c l a i m. See Ch e b c h o u b v . I

NS , 25 7 F . 3d 10 38 , 10 43 (9th C i r. 20 01 ). O urr e vi e w of

the r e c or d pe r s ua de s us tha ts ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the B IA ’ s det erm i nat i on thatthe P et i t i on er s w er e notcr edi bl e. T he B IA prov i ded

“ spec i fi c, cogentre as on s” for i t s c re di bi l i ty f i nd i ng s, no t abl y, the i ncon si st enci es be tw e e n the appl i c a t i on a nd t e s t i m ony r e ga r di ng w hythe appl i c a t i on w a s not t i m el y f i l ed and w ho w as det ai ned fol l ow i ng F eng’ s abo rt i on . T he confl i ct8

r e ga r di ng w ho w a s de t a i ne d goe s t o the he a rtof the c l a i m , a s i tunde rm i ne s the s ol e i nc i de ntof

pa s tpe r s e c ut i on. T he s c a ntdoc um e nt a rye vi de nc e s ubm i tt e d bythe P e t i t i one r s doe s not c o m p e l th e c o n c lu s io n th a t F e n g w a s f o r c e d to h a v e a n ab o rtio n o rth a t th e yw o u ld b e p e r s e c u te d if

r e tu rn e d to C h in a . T h e r e f o r e , th e P e titio n e r s h a v e f a ile d to es t abl i sh pastpers ec ut i on or thati ti s m ore l i kel y than n otthatthey w ou l d fac e p ersecu t i o n o r t o rtu re i n C h i n a. A cco rd i n g l y, w e d en y th e p et i t i o n o n th ese g ro u n d s. PETI TI O N D I SM I SSED I N PA R T; D EN I ED I N PA R T.