USCA11 Case: 20-10948 Date Filed: 02/03/2021 Page: 1 of 11 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 20-10948 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A209-834-118 LIE YE XIAO, a.k.a. Xiao Jie Ye, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (February 3, 2021) Before MARTIN, BRANCH, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges. USCA11 Case: 20-10948 Date Filed: 02/03/2021 Page: 2 of 11 PER CURIAM: Lie Ye Xiao (“Petitioner”), a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his second motion to reopen his removal proceedings. Petitioner sought reopening based on a purported change in country conditions. No reversible error has been shown; we deny the petition. Petitioner entered the United States in 2016 and was later charged as removable. Petitioner filed an application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. In his applications for relief, Petitioner said he had been persecuted by the Chinese government based on his membership in an underground Christian church. In 2015, Petitioner attended an underground church service being held in a church member’s home. Uniformed police officers kicked open the door of the home, arrested the church members, and accused them of participating in an “evil cult.” Petitioner was taken to the police station, interrogated, abused, and detained for fifteen days. Upon his release, Petitioner was required to report weekly to the police station and to end his participation in church activities. The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denied Petitioner’s applications for relief. The IJ determined that Petitioner had shown neither past persecution nor a well- 2 USCA11 Case: 20-10948 Date Filed: 02/03/2021 Page: 3 of 11 founded fear of future religious persecution. In pertinent part, the IJ noted that -- according to the 2015 International Religious Freedom Report on China -- Christians were permitted to practice openly through government-sanctioned churches. Further, while underground churches were subject to government- imposed restrictions and documented cases existed of harassment and detention of unregistered church members, restrictions on underground churches were not uniformly enforced. The BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision in September 2017. Petitioner sought no review of the BIA’s denial of relief in this Court. In August 2018, Petitioner filed his first motion to reopen the removal proceedings. Petitioner argued -- based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018) -- that his notice to appear was defective and, thus, the immigration court lacked jurisdiction over his proceedings. The BIA denied the motion. Petitioner filed no petition for review. In October 2018, Petitioner filed the instant motion to reopen based on changed conditions in China.* Petitioner argued that -- after his 2017 removal hearing -- the Chinese government intensified its persecution for members of * Petitioner also requested that the BIA sua sponte reopen his proceedings under its discretionary authority. The BIA denied relief, finding no exceptional circumstances warranting ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals