17-4100 Song v. Barr BIA Hom, IJ A205 457 198 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 13th day of November, two thousand 5 nineteen. 6 7 PRESENT: 8 JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 9 RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR., 10 MICHAEL H. PARK, 11 Circuit Judges. 12 _____________________________________ 13 HUANG SHENG SONG, AKA SHENG SONG 14 HUANG, 15 Petitioner, 16 17 v. 17-4100 18 NAC 19 WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES 20 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent. 22 _____________________________________ 23 24 FOR PETITIONER: Gerald Karikari, New York, NY. 25 26 FOR RESPONDENT: Joseph A. Hunt, Assistant 27 Attorney General; Cindy S. 28 Ferrier, Assistant Director; 29 Brendan P. Hogan, Trial Attorney, 30 Office of Immigration Litigation, 31 United States Department of 32 Justice, Washington, DC. 1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 2 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 3 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 4 is DENIED. 5 Petitioner Huang Sheng Song, a native and citizen of the 6 People’s Republic of China, seeks review of a December 5, 7 2017, decision of the BIA affirming an April 4, 2017, decision 8 of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for 9 asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the 10 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Huang Sheng Song, 11 No. A 205 457 198 (B.I.A. Dec. 5, 2017), aff’g No. A 205 457 12 198 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Apr. 4, 2017). We assume the 13 parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural 14 history in this case. 15 Under the circumstances of this case, we have considered 16 both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions “for the sake of 17 completeness.” Wangchuck v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 448 F.3d 18 524, 528 (2d Cir. 2006). The applicable standards of review 19 are well established. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Hong Fei 20 Gao v. Sessions, 891 F.3d 67, 76 (2d Cir. 2018); Wei Sun v. 21 Sessions, 883 F.3d 23, 27 (2d Cir. 2018). Substantial 2 1 evidence supports the adverse credibility determination and, 2 absent credible testimony, Song failed to establish past 3 persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution. 4 Substantial evidence supports the ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals