Biao Yang v. Gonzales

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an IJ may rely on lack of corroborative evidence when the petitioner's credibility \has already been called into question\
• concluding that an intervening BIA decision articulated a new standard for finding an asylum petition frivolous and “the most prudent course of action is to remand these cases for the BIA”
• recognizing that “[a]n applicant’s failure to corroborate his ... testimony may bear on credibility, because the absence of corroboration in general makes an applicant unable to rehabilitate testimony that has already been called into question”
• recognizing that “applicant’s failure to corroborate his ... testimony may bear on credibility, because the absence of corroboration in general makes an applicant unable to rehabilitate testimony that has already been called into question”
• holding that “applicant’s failure to corroborate . . . testimony may bear on credibility, because the absence of corroboration in general makes an applicant unable to rehabilitate testimony that has already been called into question”
• recognizing that “[a]n applicant’s failure to corroborate his ... testimony may bear on credibility, because the absence of corroboration in general makes an applicant unable to rehabilitate testimony that has already been called into question”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).