Opinion ID: 3025404
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Lin’s Claim for Withholding of Removal

Text: Withholding of removal is appropriate only if there is a “clear probability” that the alien’s life or freedom would be threatened upon her removal to a particular country. 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3); Chen v. Gonzales, 434 F.3d 212, 216 (3d Cir. 2005). This “clear probability” standard is stricter than the “well-founded fear” standard. Zubeda v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 463, 469-70 (3d Cir. 2003). As discussed above, Lin failed to establish that she had a well-founded fear of persecution. As such, the determination that she failed to establish a “clear probability” of persecution should she be returned to China is likewise supported by substantial evidence. C. Lin’s Claim Under the Convention Against Torture The Convention Against Torture (codified at note to 8 U.S.C. § 1231; implemented by 8 C.F.R. §§ 206.16 and 206.18) requires withholding where the alien can show that it is “more likely than not” that she will be tortured by the government upon removal. Chen, 434 F.3d at 216. Torture is defined to exclude “lesser forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading 6 treatment or punishment not constituting torture.” Id. (quoting 8 C.F.R. § 208.18). Lin produced no evidence that she would be tortured, other than her brief testimony she believed that the Chinese government would somehow find out that she had a second child and sterilize her. The 2004 State Department report “China: Profile of Asylum Claims and Country Conditions,” in contrast, indicates that local physicians have not seen forced abortions or sterilizations in Fujian Province in recent years and that families who return to Fujian with more than one child after living abroad are assessed compensation fees. As such, the determination that Lin failed to show that it was more likely than not that she would be tortured (namely sterilized) upon return to China was also supported by substantial evidence.