Xia Yue Chen v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that an adverse credibility determination should be “based upon inconsistent statements, contradictory evidence, and inherently improbable testimony,” whereas corroboration hinges on the sufficiency of an applicant’s evidence
• observing that “[t]he IJ seems to have impermissibly blurred the line between the credibility of a claimant and the adequacy of proof to support the claim of asylum.”
• observing that “[t]he IJ seems to have impermissibly blurred the line between the credibility of a claimant and the adequacy of proof to support the claim of asylum.”
• denying petition for review of immigration judge’s decision without a remand, despite legal error, because result was still supported by substantial evidence
• “[E]ven a credible asylum applicant may be required to supply corroborating evidence in order to meet [her] burden of proof.”
• “If the IJ’s decision in this case is supported by substantial evidence in the record, then his failure to make a valid credibility determination would not bar this Court’s denial of the petition for review without a remand.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).