Case Name: YAN CHEN, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, United States Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-03
Citations: 698 F. App'x 2
Docket Number: 10-2361(L), 11-299(Con)
Parties: YAN CHEN, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, United States Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: PRESENT: JON 0. NEWMAN, DENNIS JACOBS, PIERRE N. LEVAL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 698
Pages: 2–3

Head Matter:
YAN CHEN, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, United States Attorney General, Respondent.
10-2361(L), 11-299(Con)
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
October 3, 2017
FOR PETITIONER: Richard Tarzia, Belle Mead, New Jersey.
FOR RESPONDENT: Tony West, Assistant Attorney General; Stephen J. Flynn, Assistant Director; Robert Michael Stalzer, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.
PRESENT: JON 0. NEWMAN, DENNIS JACOBS, PIERRE N. LEVAL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Petitioner Yan Chen, a native and citizen of China, seeks review of (1) a May 18, 2010, decision of the BIA that reversed an Immigration Judge's ("IJ") grant of asylum, In re Yan Chen, No. [ AXXX XXX XXX ] (B.I.A. May 18, 2010), rev'g No. [ AXXX XXX XXX ] (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Apr. 14, 2009), and (2) a December 29, 2010, decision of the BIA that denied her motion to reopen, In re Yan Chen, No. [ AXXX XXX XXX ] (B.I.A. Dec. 29, 2010). We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case.
The applicable standards of review are well established. See Jian Hui Shao v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 138, 157-58, 168-69 (2d Cir. 2008); see also Wu Lin v. Lynch, 813 F.3d 122, 129 (2d Cir. 2016). Chen applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, and later moved to reopen removal proceedings, asserting a fear of persecution based on the birth of her two children in the United States purportedly in violation of China's population control program. For largely the same reasons as this Court set forth in Jian Hui Shao, 546 F.3d at 156-73, we find no error in the BIA's determination on de novo review that Chen failed to demonstrate an objectively reasonable well-founded fear of persecution based on the birth of her children in the United States.
For the foregoing reasons, the Government's motion for summary denial in 11-299(Con) is GRANTED and the petitions for review in both 10-2361(L) and 11-299(Con) are DENIED.