Ninth Circuit· 9/6/2013
Yan Zhao v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Citations
- 728 F.3d 1144
- 2013 WL 4767353
- 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 18590
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that BIA may not give diminished weight to photocopy because its practice manual instructs parties to submit photocopies
- holding that BIA may not afford 16 diminished weight to a photocopy because “its own Appeals Practice Manual” 17 instructs parties to submit photocopies
- recognizing that “[i]n asylum eases involving China’s family planning policy, the BIA ... looks to the ‘alien’s local province, municipality, or other locally-defined area’ ” (internal citation omitted)
- noting that a petitioner could demonstrate an objectively reasonable fear of persecution by providing evidence of provincial policy or of strict enforcement of that policy in her city or town
- providing that “the BIA instructs petitioners not to file original documents”
- finding the BIA erred in requiring a Chinese petitioner to provide evidence of the government policy in her town and noting that “[n]either the BIA nor this court has previously required municipal-level proof when the petitioner presents province-level proof”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Barry, Fisher, Raymond, Sidney, Silverman, Thomas
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez v. Jefferson SessionsNinth Circuit· 2017-03-08· cited 489×
- Jose Tzompantzi-Salazar v. Merrick GarlandNinth Circuit· 2022-02-09· cited 171×
- Shouchen Yang v. Loretta E. LynchNinth Circuit· 2016-05-19· cited 40×
- Atm Magfoor Rahman Sarkar v. Merrick GarlandNinth Circuit· 2022-07-01· cited 40×
- Bent v. GarlandNinth Circuit· 2024-08-15· cited 31×
- Kami Etemadi v. Merrick GarlandNinth Circuit· 2021-09-09· cited 16×
- Xiu Ling Chen v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.Eighth Circuit· 2014-05-13· cited 14×
- Kalulu v. GarlandNinth Circuit· 2024-03-11· cited 11×
- Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez v. Loretta E. LynchNinth Circuit· 2015-11-19· cited 7×
- Shouchen Yang v. Loretta E. LynchNinth Circuit· 2016-02-26
- Jose Tzompantzi-Salazar v. Merrick GarlandNinth Circuit· 2022-04-21
- Bent v. GarlandNinth Circuit· 2024-09-06
- Kalulu v. BondiNinth Circuit· 2025-02-13
- Urquia-Yanez v. BlancheNinth Circuit· 2026-05-08
Cites
19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Jian Hui Shao v. MukaseySecond Circuit· 2008-10-10· cited 2,195×
- Khadija Mohammed v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General, Khadija Ahmed Mohamed v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2005-03-10· cited 1,722×
- Ranjit Singh v. Immigration and Naturalization ServicesNinth Circuit· 2002-07-12· cited 599×
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Wichita Board of TradeSupreme Court· 1973-06-18· cited 535×
- Toufighi v. MukaseyNinth Circuit· 2008-08-18· cited 512×
- Li Chen Zheng, AKA Zheng Li Chen v. John Ashcroft, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2003-06-18· cited 500×
- Leticia Cordon-Garcia v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceNinth Circuit· 2000-03-03· cited 327×
- Carlos Humberto Ordonez v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceNinth Circuit· 2003-10-02· cited 318×
- Usha Bhasin v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2005-09-01· cited 248×
- S-VBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2000-07-01· cited 175×
- Ali v. HolderNinth Circuit· 2011-03-18· cited 169×
- He v. GonzalesNinth Circuit· 2007-09-04· cited 160×
- Zeferino Mendez-Gutierrez v. John Ashcroft, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2003-08-20· cited 146×
- C-CBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2006-07-01· cited 133×
- J-H-SBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2007-07-01· cited 113×
- Singh v. GonzalesNinth Circuit· 2007-07-19· cited 84×
- Ling Zhou v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2006-02-07· cited 73×
- Vatyan v. MukaseyNinth Circuit· 2007-11-27· cited 51×
- Qiu Chen v. Eric Holder, Jr.Seventh Circuit· 2013-05-09· cited 33×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.