Opinion ID: 1309959
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Availability of a Successive Asylum Application

Text: [11] Lin submits that independent of her motion to reopen, under 8 U.S.C. ß 1158(a)(2)(D), she is entitled to file a freestanding successive asylum application. [1] This argument is foreclosed by our prior precedent. See Chen, 524 F.3d at 1032. In Chen, we determined that [i]t was reasonable for the BIA to conclude that to permit such an avoidance of the time and number limits on motions to reopen [by allowing a freestanding claim for asylum under ß 1158(a)(2)(D)] would make nonsense of the more restrictive exception in ß 1229a(c)(7). Id. The only avenue available for Lin to file her successive asylum application is through a successful motion to reopen. Because Lin's motion to reopen was properly denied, she cannot file a successive asylum application. See id.