Chunhong Xu v. Ashcroft

Good Law
108 F. App'x 482
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 26, 2004No. 02-73770; Agency Nos. A75-598-563, A75-598-564California1,123 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*484 MEMORANDUM **

Married petitioners Chunhong Xu and Shihui Li are natives and citizens of China who seek asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Immigration Judge (“IJ”) Anthony Atenaide denied relief, and the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirmed without opinion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we grant the petition for review and remand.

The IJ made adverse credibility findings against Xu and Li. We review the grounds supporting the IJ’s findings for substantial evidence. See Mendoza Manimbao v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 655, 658 (9th Cir.2003); see also Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003) (explaining that in streamlined cases, we review the IJ’s decision as the final agency determination).

Several of the grounds cited by the IJ rest on “speculation and conjecture,” rather than substantial evidence. Shah v. INS, 220 F.3d 1062, 1071 (9th Cir.2000) (“Speculation and conjecture cannot form the basis of an adverse credibility finding, which must instead be based on substantial evidence.”). There is no reason to believe that Xu “had no remorse in leaving her children in China.”…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.