Case: 18-12209 Date Filed: 07/26/2019 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 18-12209 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A205-222-187 QIQI CHEN, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (July 26, 2019) Before MARCUS, ROSENBAUM, and BRANCH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 18-12209 Date Filed: 07/26/2019 Page: 2 of 8 Qiqi Chen seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal under both the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) and the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In his petition for review, Chen argues that the agency did not consider the totality of the circumstances when evaluating his credibility, that the agency’s adverse credibility determination is not supported by substantial evidence, and that the agency’s demand for unavailable corroborating evidence of his arrest and bond payment was unreasonable. Chen testified at the merits hearing before the IJ, recounting his 2010 arrest, two-week detention, and beating by Chinese authorities for being a member of an illegal house church in China. He further stated that his mother had paid a bond for his release but he presented no corroborating evidence of his arrest or of his mother’s payment of the bond. He admitted that he lied on his student visa application and during his consular interview about his intent to attend a United States university. Chen’s testimony regarding his falsehood on his visa application was internally inconsistent, as he first testified that it was his only way to leave China, but later admitted that he had not sought any other alternatives. The IJ issued a decision denying Chen’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under CAT, and ordering him removed 2 Case: 18-12209 Date Filed: 07/26/2019 Page: 3 of 8 from the United States. The IJ determined that Chen’s testimony regarding his two-week detention and arrest was sparse, and noted that he failed to provide any corroboration of his mother’s bond payment. The IJ reasoned that Chen was not credible because he lied, under penalty of perjury, on his visa application about becoming a student at the university and continued to lie about being a student during his interview with the consulate officer. The IJ also concluded that Chen was not entitled to relief under CAT because his testimony was not credible, he provided weak testimony without corroboration, and he was able to leave China using his true identity without delay or apprehension. Chen appealed to the BIA, which affirmed the IJ’s decision and dismissed Chen’s appeal. The BIA concluded that, in light of his weak testimony, his admission of untruthfulness in obtaining a visa, and the lack of any corroborating evidence, Chen did not satisfy his burden of proof for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. It thus affirmed the IJ’s decision and dismissed his appeal. Chen then ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals