Mei Na Piao v. Holder
Docket: No. 08-3003-ag
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; March 26, 2009; Federal Appellate Court
Mei Na Piao, an ethnic Korean Christian from China, sought judicial review of a BIA order that upheld an Immigration Judge's (IJ) denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT) relief. The BIA affirmed the IJ's burden of proof finding but did not clarify its stance on the IJ's credibility determination regarding Piao, leading to an assumption of her credibility for review purposes. The court reviews factual findings under a substantial evidence standard and legal questions de novo. The IJ concluded that Piao did not demonstrate a nexus between her feared harm and the protected grounds outlined in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). To qualify for asylum under the REAL ID Act, an applicant must show that one of the protected grounds was a central reason for persecution. Piao argued that she was persecuted for harboring an undocumented North Korean immigrant, but the evidence indicated that her potential arrest by Chinese authorities was due to this violation of law and not her political beliefs. Additionally, Piao failed to provide evidence of past persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution based on her religion. Consequently, the agency's denial of her asylum application was deemed appropriate, and since she could not establish eligibility for asylum, she also failed to qualify for withholding of removal. The denial of her CAT relief application was similarly upheld. Piao contends that the Immigration Judge (IJ) did not adequately evaluate the country conditions evidence, asserting that the reports are biased and outdated. However, she does not provide record evidence demonstrating a likelihood of torture upon her return to China or show that the agency overly relied on State Department reports. The legal standard requires specific evidence indicating that someone in her situation would be more likely than not to be tortured. Consequently, the agency's findings are upheld. The petition for review is denied, any stay of removal previously granted is vacated, and any pending motion for a stay is dismissed as moot. Additionally, Piao's request for oral argument is denied. Although Piao did not challenge the IJ's denial of her Convention Against Torture (CAT) claim before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), the BIA addressed the issue, seemingly overlooking her failure to exhaust.