USCA11 Case: 21-12122 Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Page: 1 of 9 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-12122 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ JUNJUN XIE, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A216-268-778 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 21-12122 Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Page: 2 of 9 2 Opinion of the Court 21-12122 Before JORDAN, NEWSOM, and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Junjun Xie, a Chinese national proceeding pro se, seeks re- view of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) final order affirm- ing the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his counseled application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). He contends sub- stantial evidence compels a finding he suffered past persecution be- cause he was detained for fifteen days, regularly beaten, and effec- tively prohibited from practicing his religion with an underground Christian house church. 1 He also asserts substantial evidence com- pels a finding he had a well-founded fear of future persecution, 1Xie also asserts the IJ’s adverse credibility and corroboration determinations are not supported by substantial evidence. The BIA stated it did not consider the IJ’s credibility determination and it did not adopt the IJ’s corroboration determination or discuss corroboration. Thus, this issue is not properly before us. See Tang v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 578 F.3d 1270, 1275 (11th Cir. 2009) (stating we exclusively review the final BIA determination unless the BIA expressly adopts the IJ’s decision or relies upon its reasoning, in which case we review the adopted or relied-upon portions of the IJ’s opinion and any part of the BIA determination where the BIA rendered its own opinion and reasoning); N.L.R.B. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 526 F.3d 729, 732 n.2 (11th Cir. 2008) (explaining in deciding whether to uphold a BIA determination, we are limited to the grounds the BIA relied upon). USCA11 Case: 21-12122 Date Filed: 06/13/2022 Page: 3 of 9 21-12122 Opinion of the Court 3 which qualified him for asylum and withholding of removal. Fi- nally, he contends substantial evidence compels a finding he would more likely than not be tortured upon return to China. After re- view, 2 we grant his petition in part and deny it in part. I. DISCUSSION A. Past Persecution The Attorney General may grant asylum to a non-citizen who meets the Immigration and Nationality Act’s definition of a refugee. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(A). A refugee includes a person who is (1) outside the country of his nationality, (2) unwilling to return to that country, and (3) unable to avail himself of its protection (4) because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of his religion. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). “Persecution” is not statutorily defined. De Santamaria v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 525 F.3d 999, 1008 (11th Cir. 2008). We have held persecution is an extreme concept that is evaluated …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals