Yi Quan Chen v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 326 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 2003). · Go Syfert
Search
Yi Quan Chen v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 326 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 2003). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
23 citation events (23 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Kanthasami v. Gonzales (ca9, 2006-06-07)
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kanthasami v. Gonzales
9th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16 , 123 S.Ct. 353 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002); Chen v. INS, 326 F.3d 1316, 1317 (9th Cir.2003) (holding, in hght of Ventura , that following a reversal of an adverse credibility finding, we must re mand for determination of an asylum applicant’s statutory eligibility for asylum).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Qiuhong Ren v. Gonzales
9th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16 , 123 S.Ct. 353 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam); Chen v. INS, 326 F.3d 1316, 1317 (9th Cir.2003) (order) (remanding to the agency for determination of an asylum applicant’s statutory eligibility for relief subsequent to the reversal of an adverse credibility determination).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ye Min Oo v. Gonzales
9th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16 , 123 S.Ct. 353 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002); Chen v. INS, 326 F.3d 1316, 1317 (9th Cir.2003) (holding, in light of Ventura , that following a reversal of an adverse credibility finding, we must remand for determination of an asylum applicant’s statutory eligibility for asylum).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ye Min Oo v. Gonzales
9th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16 , 123 S.Ct. 353 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002); Chen v. INS, 326 F.3d 1316, 1317 (9th Cir.2003) (holding, in light of Ventura , that following a reversal of an adverse credibility finding, we must remand for determination of an asylum applicant’s statutory eligibility for asylum).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kaur v. Ashcroft
9th Cir. · 2004 · confidence medium
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12 , 123 S.Ct. 353 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002); Chen v. INS, 266 F.3d 1094, 1101 (9th Cir.2001), vacated on other grounds, 537 U.S. 1016 , 123 S.Ct. 549 , 154 L.Ed.2d 423 (2002), reinstated in pertinent part, 326 F.3d 1316, 1317 (9th Cir.2003) (remanding the issue of eligibility for asylum and withholding of deportation but reaffirming that “this court’s [prior] reversal of the BIA’s adverse credibility finding still stands ... [because] the BIA failed to provide the requisite specific, cogent reason for discrediting [the petitioner]”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Tinoco-Aguilera v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
9th Cir. · 2003 · confidence medium
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12 , 123 S.Ct. 353, 355-56 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002); Chen v. INS, 326 F.3d 1316, 1317 (9th Cir.2003). 2 In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Ventura, 123 S.Ct. at 355-56 , and our recent order in Chen, 326 F.3d at 1316-17 , we remand to the BIA for it to decide the Tinocos’ prima facie eligibility for suspension of deportation and the related issue of prejudice.
cited Cited "see" Singh v. Ashcroft
9th Cir. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chen v. INS, 326 F.3d 1316, 1317 (9th Cir.2003); INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 , 123 S.Ct. 353 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002).
cited Cited "see" Shergill v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
9th Cir. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Chen v. INS, 326 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir.2003); INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12 , 123 S.Ct. 353, 355-56 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Martinez v. Ashcroft
9th Cir. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Chen v. INS, 266 F.3d 1094, 1100 (9th Cir.2001), overruled on other grounds by 537 U.S. 1016 , 123 S.Ct. 549 , 154 L.Ed.2d 423 (2002), on remand to 326 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir.2003); Osorio v. INS, 99 F.3d 928, 932 (9th Cir.1996) (suggesting a “language barrier” as a possible explanation for an inconsistency between a witness’s testimony and an application).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Zi Lin Chen v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General
9th Cir. · 2004 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See Ventura, 537 U.S. at 17 , 123 S.Ct. 353 (“[T]he agency can bring its expertise to bear upon the matter; it can evaluate the evidence; it can make an initial determination; and, in doing so, it can, through informed discussion and analysis, help a court later determine whether its decision exceeds the leeway that the law provides.”); see also Yi Quan Chen v. INS, 326 F.3d 1316, 1317 (9th Cir.2003) (“Yi Quan Chen II”) (remanding asylum and withholding of removal claims to the BIA for further consideration and investigation in light of the court’s earlier decision on the applicant�…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Yi Quan CHEN, Petitioner,
v.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent
00-70478.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Apr 25, 2003.
326 F.3d 1316
Maureen Laflin, Monica Schurtman, Moscow, ID, Yi Quan Chen, Florence, AZ, Daniel R. Anderson, Moscow, ID, for Petitioner., Regional Counsel, Laguna Niguel, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, San Francisco, CA, John C. Cunningham, Karen Fletcher Torstenson, John J. Andre, John J. Andre, Robbin K. Blaya, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Lay, Trott, Berzon.
Cited by 19 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

In our prior opinion, Chen v. I.N.S., 266 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir.2001), this court reviewed Yi Quan Chen’s application for asylum and withholding of removal pursuant to § 208(a) and § 241(b)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (I.N.A.), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a), 1231(b)(3). The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) had dismissed Chen’s application and agreed with the Immigration Judge’s conclusion that Chen lacked credibility. This court overruled the BIA, holding that Chen had established his eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal. Chen, 266 F.3d at 1099. We found that Chen was credible and had produced direct and specific evidence of past persecution. Id. at 1101. We also held that Chen had a well-founded fear of future persecution and established a clear probability that he would be persecuted if returned to China. Id. at 1099. We ultimately remanded the ease to the Attorney General to determine in the exercise of his discretion whether to grant asylum to Chen. Id. at 1103.

In I.N.S. v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002), the Supreme Court held that the Ninth Circuit[*1317] had erred by failing to remand an asylum case to the BIA for additional investigation or explanation relating to the changed circumstances in Guatemala. The Court pointed out that under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1253(h)(1) (1994), the law entrusts the agency to make the basic asylum eligibility decision. Ventura, 123 S.Ct. at 355-56.

On November 12, 2002, the Supreme Court vacated our ruling in Chen and remanded the case to this court for further consideration in light of Ventura. Upon reconsideration, we now remand to the BIA for it to decide Chen’s application for asylum and withholding of removal. In doing so, we stress that this court’s reversal of the BIA’s adverse credibility finding still stands based upon the analysis in our prior opinion. We held the BIA failed to provide the requisite specific,, cogent reason for discrediting Chen.

The case is remanded to the BIA for further consideration and investigation in light of our prior ruling on Chen’s credibility.

REMANDED.