Yan Xia Zhang v. Mukasey

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the BIA’s interpretation comports with the text and structure of the statute,” as well as “with the acknowledged policies underlying our asylum law”
• holding that the BIA did not abuse its discretion when considering prior adverse credibility findings when evaluating petitioner’s motion to reopen
• recognizing that if a “necessary element” of the petitioner’s claim fails, the BIA “owe[s] no duty to rehearse the rest of [the petitioner’s] evidence for sake of completeness”
• holding that the denial of a motion to reopen was not abuse of discretion where petitioner “made no attempt—either before the Board or this court—to rehabilitate her credibility”
• holding that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in taking into account the IJ’s and BIA’s prior, unrebutted adverse credibility determination in reviewing documentation submitted with a motion to reopen
• concluding that extending the deadline in a motion to reopen removal proceedings is disfavored 11 No. 21-3764, Njai v. Garland where it “permits an alien to manufacture a more perfect asylum application while living illegally in the United States”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).