Case law · Appeals court · Federal

Yan Chen v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General, 1

Decided
August 2, 2005
Docket
Docket 04-0591-AG
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Federal

Cited 2,703 timesNo negative treatment found in this library

What later courts said

  • holding that we may not rely 23 on an adverse credibility determination where the BIA 4 1 explicitly assumed credibility — Yang v. Sessions (2018)
  • holding that, 2 where there is no adverse credibility determination in the decision being reviewed by this Court, 3 we assume that the petitioner is credible — Mendez v. Holder (2009)
  • stating that this Court assumes, but does not determine, an applicant’s credibility when the agency does not make an explicit credibility determination — Pacheco v. Holder (2009)

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

STRAUB, Circuit Judge.

Petitioner Yan Chen requests review of the January 29, 2004, decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA” or “Board”) dismissing his appeal of an August 2, 2002, decision of the Immigration Judge denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Because the Board failed to consider important evidence supporting Chen’s petition, namely, a country condition report corroborating Chen’s claims, we grant the petition for review, vacate the decision of the Board, and remand the case to the Board for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

BACKGROUND In his asylum application, Yan Chen (“Chen”), a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, alleges that he has been practicing Christianity throughout his life and that, prior to his departure from China in May 2001, he suffered various abuses by the Chinese government on account of his religion. At the hearing on his application, Chen testified that government officials came to his church on August 23, 2000, and warned members “to dismiss and leave the area.” According to Chen’s testimony, the officials then destroyed Christian song books and Bibles and, ultimately, destroyed the church. They also warned members “not to have this type of gatherings [sic] in the future” and indicated that the church members “should go to only those [gatherings] that are designated by the government.” Chen claims that after this incident, church members congregated at members’ houses. Chen testified that on January 18, 2001, while he was handing out flyers containing religious messages in a public area, a church member informed him that the gov [*270] ernment had discovered the church’s alternative meeting places. Chen later learned that some church members and the church’s preacher had been arrested. Chen also testified that he learned that his name is on the Chinese government’s list of those who have handed out verboten religious flyers. Finally, Chen testified that some time after January 18, 2001, government officials came to Chen’s house looking for him. Chen subsequently fled China, entered the United States, and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the CAT.

Statutes cited

Cite this

Yan Chen v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General, 1, 417 F.3d 268 (2005)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.