From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ya Yun Zheng v. Holder

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Jul 9, 2009
328 F. App'x 96 (2d Cir. 2009)

Opinion

No. 08-0559-ag.

July 9, 2009.

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, that the petition for review is DENIED.

Gary J. Yerman, New York, NY, for Petitioner.

Gregory G. Katsas, Acting Assistant Attorney General; David V. Bernal, Assistant Director; Jesse M. Bless, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Present: DENNIS JACOBS, Chief Judge, JON O. NEWMAN and JOHN M. WALKER, JR., Circuit Judges.



SUMMARY ORDER

Petitioner Ya Yun Zheng, a native and citizen of the People's Republic of China, seeks review of a January 8, 2008 order of the BIA affirming the October 6, 2006 decision of Immigration Judge ("IJ") Helen Sichel, which denied her motion to reopen, and denying her motion to remand. In re Ya Yun Zheng, No. A073 038 154 (B.I.A. Jan. 8, 2008), aff'g No. A073 038 154 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Oct. 6, 2006). We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case.

When the BIA adopts the decision of the IJ and supplements the IJ's decision, this Court reviews the decision of the IJ as supplemented by the BIA. See Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). We review the agency's denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. Ali v. Gonzales, 448 F.3d 515, 517 (2d Cir. 2006). Where the agency considers relevant evidence of country conditions in evaluating a motion to reopen, we review the agency's factual findings under the substantial evidence standard. See Jian Hui Shao v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 138, 169 (2d Cir. 2008). We find that the agency did not err in denying Zheng's untimely motion to reopen.

Zheng argues that the agency erred in concluding that she failed to demonstrate material changed country conditions sufficient to excuse the time limitation for filing her motion to reopen. However, this argument fails where we have previously reviewed the BIA's consideration of similar evidence in the context of an untimely motion to reopen and have found no error in its conclusion that such evidence was insufficient to establish material changed country conditions or an objectively reasonable fear of persecution. See id. at 169-72 (noting that "[w]e do not ourselves attempt to resolve conflicts in record evidence, a task largely within the discretion of the agency"); see also Wei Guang Wang v. BIA, 437 F.3d 270, 275 (2d Cir. 2006) (noting that while the BIA must consider evidence such as "the oft-cited Aird affidavit, which [it] is asked to consider time and again[,] . . . it may do so in summary fashion without a reviewing court presuming that it has abused its discretion"). Further, there is nothing in the agency's decisions compelling the conclusion that it failed to take into account all of Zheng's evidence as we "presume that [the agency] has taken into account all of the evidence before [it], unless the record compellingly suggests otherwise." See Xiao Ji Chen v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 471 F.3d 315, 337 n. 17 (2d Cir. 2006).

Finally, the agency's determination that Zheng was ineligible to file a successive asylum application was not in error. See Yuen Jin v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 143, 156, 158-59 (2d Cir. 2008). Zheng waives any challenge to the BIA's denial of her motion to remand. See Yueqing Zhang v. Gonzales, 426 F.3d 540, 541 n. 1, 545 n. 7 (2d Cir. 2005).

For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of removal that the Court previously granted in this petition is VACATED, and any pending motion for a stay of removal in this petition is DISMISSED as moot. Any pending request for oral argument in this petition is DENIED in accordance with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2), and Second Circuit Local Rule 34(b).


Summaries of

Ya Yun Zheng v. Holder

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Jul 9, 2009
328 F. App'x 96 (2d Cir. 2009)
Case details for

Ya Yun Zheng v. Holder

Case Details

Full title:YA YUN ZHENG, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., United States Attorney…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Jul 9, 2009

Citations

328 F. App'x 96 (2d Cir. 2009)