16-4156 You v. Sessions BIA Loprest, IJ A087 707 836 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 February, two thousand 5 eighteen. 6 7 PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS, 8 BARRINGTON D. PARKER, 9 CHRISTOPHER F. DRONEY, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 SHIJIE YOU, 14 Petitioner, 15 16 v. 16-4156 17 NAC 18 JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, 19 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 20 Respondent. 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Curt Donald Schmidt, The Law 24 Office of Joe Zhou & Associates, 25 PLLC, Flushing, NY. 26 27 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant 28 Attorney General; Cindy S. 29 Ferrier, Assistant Director; 30 Brendan P. Hogan, Trial Attorney, 31 Office of Immigration Litigation, 32 United States Department of 33 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 Shijie You, a native and citizen of the 6 People’s Republic of China, seeks review of a November 14, 7 2016, decision of the BIA, affirming a March 17, 2016, 8 decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying You’s 9 application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief 10 under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Shijie 11 You, No. A087 707 836 (B.I.A. Nov. 14, 2016), aff’g No. 12 A087 707 836 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Mar. 17, 2016). We 13 assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts 14 and procedural history in this case. 15 We have reviewed the IJ’s decision as modified by the 16 BIA, i.e., minus the adverse credibility determination that 17 the BIA declined to reach. See Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t 18 of Justice, 426 F.3d 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005). The applicable 19 standards of review are well established. See 8 U.S.C. 20 § 1252(b)(4)(B); Yanqin Weng v. Holder, 562 F.3d 510, 513 (2d 21 Cir. 2009). 22 You asserted that police in China detained and beat him 23 for disturbing the peace when he organized a protest and 24 fundraiser after the death of a coworker who had been forced 2 1 to retire early. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals