FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 23 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MIN FU; YIBIN JIANG, No. 08-72470
Petitioners, Agency Nos. A075-768-359
A075-768-360
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, MEMORANDUM *
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 17, 2012 **
Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Min Fu and Yibin Jiang, natives and citizens of China, petition for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying their application for withholding of removal.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006).
We deny the petition for review.
Petitioners contend that the birth of their second child in the United States
violated China’s population-control policy and would subject Min Fu to forced
sterilization upon return to China, citing the experience of one or more friends in
China and a warning Min Fu received from a birth control official before leaving
China in 1997. The record does not compel the conclusion that petitioners met
their burden of showing a clear probability of persecution. See id. at 1190 (clear
probability standard requires objective evidence that it is more likely than not that
alien will be subject to persecution upon removal) (citation omitted); Lin v. Holder,
588 F.3d 981, 988 (9th Cir. 2009) (noting BIA’s conclusion in Matter of J-W-S-,
24 I. & N. Dec. 185 (BIA 2007), that the Chinese government does not have a
national policy requiring forced sterilization of a parent who returns with a second
child born outside of China). Accordingly, their withholding of removal claim
fails.
Finally, we deny petitioners’ request for oral argument.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-72470