Case Name: XIAO YONG CHEN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-10-27
Citations: 397 F. App'x 728
Docket Number: No. 08-1707-ag
Parties: XIAO YONG CHEN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS, Chief Judge, JON O. NEWMAN, PIERRE N. LEVAL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 397
Pages: 728–729

Head Matter:
XIAO YONG CHEN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 08-1707-ag.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Oct. 27, 2010.
Theodore N. Cox, New York, NY, for Petitioner.
Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney General; Michelle G. Latour, Assistant Director; Sunah Lee, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS, Chief Judge, JON O. NEWMAN, PIERRE N. LEVAL, Circuit Judges.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2), Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr., is automatically substituted for former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey as respondent in this case.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Xiao Yong Chen, a native and citizen of China, seeks review of a March 26, 2008, BIA order denying his motion to reopen. In re Xiao Yong Chen, No. [ AXXX XXX XXX ] (B.I.A. Mar. 26, 2008). Chen's motion to reopen was based on his claim that he fears persecution on account of the birth of his U.S. citizen children in violation of China's family planning policy. For largely the same reasons as this Court set forth in Jian Hui Shao v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 138 (2d Cir.2008), we find no error in the BIA's decision. See id. at 168-72. Additionally, the BIA reasonably found that Chen failed to demonstrate his prima facie eligibility for relief under the Convention Against Torture based on his purportedly illegal departure from China. See Mu Xiang Lin v. United States Dep't of Justice, 432 F.3d 156 (2d Cir.2005).
For the foregoing reasons, this petition for review is DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of removal that the Court previously granted in this petition is VACATED, and any pending motion for a stay of removal in this petition is DISMISSED as moot. Any pending request for oral argument in this petition is DENIED in accordance with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2), and Second Circuit Local Rule 34.1(b).