United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 20-1328 ___________________________ Xiaojie He lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Merrick B. Garland,1 Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: November 17, 2021 Filed: February 4, 2022 ____________ Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________ LOKEN, Circuit Judge. Xiaojie He, a twenty-eight-year-old native of China, entered the United States in April 2012 without inspection. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 1 Merrick B. Garland has been appointed to serve as Attorney General of the United States, and is substituted as respondent pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). initiated removal proceedings. He conceded removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), claiming past persecution and a well-founded fear of future persecution and torture in China because of his Christian faith. After a hearing at which He testified, the Immigration Judge (IJ) denied relief. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed with an opinion. He seeks judicial review of the final order of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252. He does not challenge the denial of his application for relief under the CAT. We deny the petition for review. I. The Administrative Proceedings At the May 24, 2018 removal hearing, He testified that he had two encounters with local Chinese officials that are central to his claim of religious persecution. The first occurred in October 2011 when He first attended a house-church meeting at a friend’s invitation. Four or five police officers soon charged in, said the gathering was illegal, and took He and the other seven or eight attendees to a police station, where an officer punched He in the chest once and kicked He in the knees and shins. He did not seek medical attention for these minor injuries. The police detained He for approximately 15 days, then warned him “not to participate in illegal gatherings anymore.” He was not given enough to eat while in detention. In January 2012, He attended a house-church service for the second time. Again police broke up the meeting, this time detaining He for approximately 30 days, but inflicting no physical harm. On release, officers advised He to report weekly. Instead, his father arranged for “snakeheads” to transport He to Mexico’s border with the United States (via Russia and Cuba, using a Chinese passport), where he illegally entered the United States to seek asylum. The IJ found He’s testimony credible. In denying relief, the IJ’s Decision summarized He’s testimony in detail, further noting: (i) He does not know the denomination of the faith that was practiced during the two gatherings he attended. -2- “He thinks that it was a Christian faith because his friend told him that it was.” (ii) In between the two gatherings, He talked to his friend about going to church but did not go because of the first detention. In his hometown He knew there were Christian …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals