16-3202 Zou v. Sessions BIA Van Wyke, IJ A089 167 620 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 for 2 the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States 3 Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 4 16th day of November, two thousand seventeen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 8 ROBERT D. SACK, 9 SUSAN L. CARNEY, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 JIN ZOU, 14 Petitioner, 15 16 v. 16-3202 17 NAC 18 JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, 19 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 20 Respondent. 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Zhou Wang, New York, NY. 24 25 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant 26 Attorney General; Julie M. Iversen, 27 Senior Litigation Counsel; Kathryn 28 M. McKinney, Attorney; Lindsay G. 29 Donahue, Law Clerk, Office of 30 Immigration Litigation, United 31 States Department of Justice, 32 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 is 4 DENIED. 5 Petitioner Jin Zou, a native and citizen of the People’s 6 Republic of China, seeks review of an August 31, 2016, decision 7 of the BIA affirming an April 23, 2015, decision of an 8 Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Zou’s application for asylum, 9 withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against 10 Torture (“CAT”). In re Jin Zou, No. A 089 167 620 (B.I.A. Aug. 11 31, 2016), aff’g No. A 089 167 620 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Apr. 23, 12 2015). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying 13 facts and procedural history in this case. 14 In lieu of filing a brief, the Government moves for summary 15 denial of Zou’s petition for review. Summary denial is 16 warranted only if a petition is frivolous, Pillay v. INS, 45 17 F.3d 14, 17 (2d Cir. 1995), and Zou has filed his merits brief. 18 Accordingly, we treat the Government’s motion as a response to 19 that brief, and deny the petition. 20 I. Adverse Credibility Determination 21 Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed the 22 IJ’s decision as modified by the BIA and consider only whether 23 the factual findings that the BIA relied on provide substantial 2 1 evidence for the adverse ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals