17-2970(L) Zou v. Barr BIA Schoppert, IJ A205 433 863 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. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 15th day of September, two thousand twenty. PRESENT: JON O. NEWMAN, BARRINGTON D. PARKER, MICHAEL H. PARK, Circuit Judges.* _____________________________________ XIAO MING ZOU, Petitioner, 17-2970(L), v. 18-1297(Con) NAC WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. _____________________________________ FOR PETITIONER: Gary J. Yerman, New York, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General; Anthony P. * Circuit Judge Peter W. Hall, originally a member of the panel, is currently unavailable. Circuit Judge Jon O. Newman has replaced Judge Hall on the panel for this matter. See 2d Cir. IOP E(b). Nicastro, Assistant Director; Jenny C. Lee, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of these petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decisions, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petitions for review are DENIED. Petitioner Xiao Ming Zou, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, seeks review of (1) an April 3, 2018, decision of the BIA denying his motion to reopen, In re Xiao Ming Zou, No. A205 433 863 (B.I.A. Apr. 3, 2018), and (2) an August 30, 2017, decision of the BIA affirming a December 12, 2016, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), In re Xiao Ming Zou, No. A205 433 863 (B.I.A. Aug. 30, 2017), aff’g No. A205 433 863 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Dec. 12, 2016). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history. A. Docket 17-2970(L), Order of Removal Under the circumstances, we have reviewed both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions “for the sake of completeness.” Wangchuck v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 448 F.3d 524, 528 (2d 2 Cir. 2006). The applicable standards of review are well established. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Hong Fei Gao v. Sessions, 891 F.3d 67, 76 (2d Cir. 2018). “Considering the totality of the circumstances, and all relevant factors, a trier of fact may base a credibility determination on . . . the consistency between the applicant’s or witness’s written and oral statements . . . [and] ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals