Yu Xia v. U.S. 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 substantial evidence supported an adverse credibility determina- tion where the applicant’s testimony “included at least one internal inconsistency” and “one omission”
• concluding that credibility should be assessed based on the “the totality of the record,” including possible corroborating evidence
• concluding that the totality of the record adequately supported the adverse credibility determination, where the BIA identified at least one internal inconsistency and one omission, and the petitioner did not provide any corroborating evidence to rebut those inconsistencies
• explaining that “the IJ’s adverse[-]eredibility determination rested on far more than those two documents”
• holding an adverse-credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence and specific and cogent reasons where the applicant’s testimony “included at least one internal inconsistency (how old [a petitioner] was when she had [an] abortion
• affirming adverse credibility finding under substantial evidence standard

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).