Mei Chai Ye v. United States Department of Justice

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “striking similarities between affidavits are an indication that the statements are ‘canned’” (internal citation omitted
• holding that we have “firmly embraced the commonsensical notion that 14 striking similarities between affidavits are an indication that the statement are 15 ‘canned’”
• recognizing that “this court . . . has firmly embraced the commonsensical notion that striking similarities between affidavits are an indication that the statements are ‘canned’”
• holding that we 4 1 “ha[ve] firmly embraced the commonsensical notion that 2 striking similarities between affidavits are an indication 3 that the statements are 'canned'”
• holding that once an IJ has noted remarkable similarities between affidavits and complied with procedural safeguards, it is reasonable to conclude that an applicant’s general credibility is undermined
• concluding that submission of similar 4 affidavits “undermined [applicant’s] general credibility”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).