Li Hua Lin v. United States Department of Justice Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that courts give “particular deference” to “adjudicator’s observation of the applicant’s demeanor” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• recognizing that adverse credibility determination may be based in part on a finding “that the applicant is testifying from a script rather than from experience”
• holding that remand is not required where we can confidently predict that “the agency would reach the same result” absent the alleged error
• holding that there is no due process violation where the IJ’s finding was not arbitrary and the alien was not denied a full and fair opportunity to present her claims
• observing that demeanor findings are more reliable when supported by “specific examples of inconsistent testimony”
• finding that remand was necessary where an error involved a finding that the IJ labeled “the most critical issue here”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).