10-2361 (L),
Chen v. Sessions
BIA
Brennan, IJ
A088 377 910
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
3rd day of October, two thousand seventeen.
PRESENT:
JON O. NEWMAN,
DENNIS JACOBS,
PIERRE N. LEVAL,
Circuit Judges.
_____________________________________
YAN CHEN,
Petitioner,
10-2361(L),
v. 11-299(Con)
NAC
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
_____________________________________
FOR PETITIONER: Richard Tarzia, Belle Mead, New
Jersey.
FOR RESPONDENT: Tony West, Assistant Attorney
General; Stephen J. Flynn,
Assistant Director; Robert Michael
Stalzer, Trial Attorney, Office of
Immigration Litigation, United
States Department of Justice,
Washington, D.C.
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of these petitions for review of two
Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decisions, it is hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Government’s motion for
summary denial in 11-299(Con) is GRANTED and the petitions for
review are DENIED.
Petitioner Yan Chen, a native and citizen of China, seeks
review of (1) a May 18, 2010, decision of the BIA that reversed
an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) grant of asylum, In re Yan Chen,
No. A088 377 910 (B.I.A. May 18, 2010), rev’g No. A088 377 910
(Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Apr. 14, 2009), and (2) a December 29,
2010, decision of the BIA that denied her motion to reopen, In
re Yan Chen, No. A088 377 910 (B.I.A. Dec. 29, 2010). We assume
the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and
procedural history in this case.
The applicable standards of review are well established.
See Jian Hui Shao v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 138, 157-58, 168-69 (2d
Cir. 2008); see also Wu Lin v. Lynch, 813 F.3d 122, 129 (2d Cir.
2016). Chen applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and
CAT relief, and later moved to reopen removal proceedings,
asserting a fear of persecution based on the birth of her two
children in the United States purportedly in violation of
2
10242016-9
China’s population control program. For largely the same
reasons as this Court set forth in Jian Hui Shao, 546 F.3d at
156-73, we find no error in the BIA’s determination on de novo
review that Chen failed to demonstrate an objectively
reasonable well-founded fear of persecution based on the birth
of her children in the United States.
For the foregoing reasons, the Government’s motion for
summary denial in 11-299(Con) is GRANTED and the petitions for
review in both 10-2361(L) and 11-299(Con) are DENIED.
FOR THE COURT:
Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
3
10242016-9