Interim Decision #2938 

MATTER OF MAY 

In Via Petition Proceedings 

A-24967547 

Decided by Board April 26, 1983 

The Board of Immigration Appeals adopts the State Department assessment of the 

reliability of certificates issued by Notarial Offices in the People's Republic of China set 

forth in, the State Department Foreign Affairs Manual as revised on July 9, 1982, which 

states, inter akin, that such certificates are issued on the basis of primary documentation 

submitted by the applicant or as a result of an investigation by notarial office staff and 

while generally reliable, are best, used in conjunction with other supporting evidence. 

Metter or t.3wang, 17 I&N Dec;. 305 (DI and Matter ofLnn IS LEN Dec. 116 (BIA 

1976), modified. 

ON BEHALF or Permossa: Edward Jew, Esquire 

950 Stockton Street, Suite 200 

San Francisco, California 94108 

BY: Milhollan, Chairman; Mardatis, Diume, Morris, and Vacca, Board Members 

In a decision dated September 1, 1982, the District Director denied 

the visa petition filed by the United States citizen petitioner to accord 

the benefifty preference status as his sister pursuant to section 203(a)(5) 

'of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1153(a)(5). The petitioner has appealed from that decision. The record will be remanded to 

the District Director. 

in order to support a claimed "siblingrelationship under section 203(a)(5) 

of the Act, the petitioner must establish that he and the beneficiary once 

qualified as the "children" of a common "parent" as those terms are 

defined by sections 101(b)(1) and (2) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(b)(1) and 

(2). Matter of Gonzatez, 17 I&N Dec. 236 (BIA 1980). The petitioner 

maintains that he and the beneficiary are offspring of the same parents. 

In support of his petition; the petitioner submitted, inter Witt, a certificate of family relationship that was issued on December 10, 1979, a birth 

certificate relating to the beneficiary that was also issued on December 

10, 1979, and a birth certificate relating to the petitioner that was 

issued on April 8, 1982. Each of those documents was issued by the 

Notarial Office, Guangdong Province, People's Republic of China, and 

each reflects that the petitioner and the beneficiary were born to the 

381 
Interim Decision #2938 

same mother and father. 

The District Director denied the visa petition for failure on the part of 

the petitioner to satisfy his burden under Matter of Brantigan, 11 I&N 

Dec. 493 (BIA 1966), of establishing that a brother-sister relationship 

exists between him and the beneficiary. Citing Matter of Cheung, 17 

I&N Dec. 365 (BIA. 1980), the District Director determined that little 

weight could, be assigned to the birth and family relationship certificates 

provided by the petitioner. In Matter of Cheuruj, id., the Board concluded that a certificate of family relationship issued by authorities of 

the People's Republic of China was of extremely limited probative value 

where, as here, the document was recently issued (i.e., not issued contemporaneously with the events described), was silent as to the source 

of the information provided, and the petitioner had failed to establish 

that .it was issued after reference to official records or to a reliable, 

independent source. See also Matter of Lau, 16 I&N' Dec. 115 (BIA 

1976). 

, On appeal, the petitioner, through counsel, urges that we reconsider 

our position with respect to the evidentiary vatic properly accorded 

dfficia' 1 documents issued in the People's Republic of China. We find 

such reevaluation appropriate in light of information originating since 

decisiqns in Matter of Cheung and Matter of Lau, supra. To the 

extent any conflict exists between our decisions in those.cases and our 

present holding,' Matter of Cheung and Matter of Lau, are herewith 

modified. 

On July 9, 1982, the section relating to the People's Republic of China 

in Appendix B of the State Department's Foreign Affaifs Manual, which 

is aped by the Immigration and Naturalization Service to determine the 

availability of foreign documents,' was extensively revised in a manner 

responsive to the concerns we voiced in Matter of G heung and Matter of 

Lau, at least with respect to documents issued by China's Notarial 

Offices. That section, as revised, provides in pertinent part: 

CHINA, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OP 

DOCUMENTS: 

Most of the documents listed below wilt be obtained front one of China's Notarial Offices 

(Gong Zheng Chu). Notarial OfEoai are sited in most large Chinese cities and also in 

rural county seats. Notarial Offices are part of the Ministry of Justice structure, and as 

such are separate from the People's Court system. 

Matter of Lau, supra, involved a notarial certificate offered as proof of a Chinese 

adoption. The document in question in Matter alCheung, supra, an "Official Certification 

of Family Relationship," was issued by. the People's Court of a local district while the 

documents here at issue, like the certificate in Matter of Las, emanated from one of 

China's Notarial Offices. The probative value of documents issued by the People's Courts . 

is a question not presently before us. 

2See Immigration and. Naturalization Service Operations Instruction 204.2a. 

382 
Interim Decision #2938 

Notaries in China do not perform the same function as their American counterparts. 

Chinese notaries affix their signatures and office seal to certificates which attest to the 

probity of claims made by the applicants. There is no manner of oath taking involved, 

but the notary is empowered to belle a certificate only if he concludes that the alleged 

facts are true. Notaries issue these certificates based either on primary documentation 

submitted by the applicant or as the result of an investigation conducted by notarial 

office staff. Notarial certificates are generally reliable but are best used in conjunction 

with other supporting evidence. The certificate's source of information does not appear 

on the certificate itself. Chinese authorities advise that documents issued by commune, 

brigade, or work unit officials are not to be accepted in lieu of notarial certificates. 

BIRTH, MARRIAGE AND DEATH CERTIFICATES: Available. Chinese citizens 

may apply for such documents at their local notarial office. Issuance of these certificates 

takes from a few days to several weeks, depending on whether the notary conducts an 

investigation. The basic issuance fee Is five yuan per document, although this may 

increase flan investigation is necessary. 

• • • 

See Vol. 9, Foreign Affairs Manual, Appendix B, "China, People's Republic of." 

We adopt the foregoing State Department assessment of the reliability of documents issued by China's Notarial Offices and shall remand the 

record to the District Director for reconsideration of his decision in light 

thereof. By the terms of that assessment, such notarial -certificates 

should not be regarded as conclusive proof of the facts recited. Rather, 

the notarial certificates should be accompanied by any and all supporting evidence that the petitioner may be able to produce. Ultimately, 

each case must be decided on its own facts with regard to the sufficiency 

of the evidence provided. Cf. Matter of Serna, 16 I&N Dec. 643 (BIA 

1978). 

In denying the visa petition in this case, the District Director referred 

to a sworn Statement allegedly made by the petitioner on January 17, 

1961, in which he asserted that he was an only child. The petitioner 

insists that the District Director erroneously attributed to him a statement made by another alien with a similar name but different alien 

number, birthday, and family history. This matter should be resolved 

on remand. 

Finally, the petitioner has submitted additional material evidence on 

appeal which should be considered by the District Director along with 

any further evidence the petitioner or the Government may wish to 

present. The District Director should thereupon enter a new decision in 

the case. In the event the decision on remand is again adverse to the 

petitioner, we direct that the case be certified back to the Board for 

review. 

ORDER The record is remanded to the District 'Director for further proceedings 'consistent with the foregoing opinion and for the entry 

383 
Interim Decision #2938 

of a new decision. 

FURTHER ORDER: Should the decision on remand again be 

adverse to the petitioner, the record shall be certified back to the Board 

for review. 

284