Ming Chen v. Gonzales

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Ming Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying Chen’s application for asylum and withholding of removal. Because the BIA adopted the decision of the Immigration Judge (IJ) who initially heard Chen’s case, we review the decision of the IJ. Kaur v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th Cir.2005). An IJ’s decision regarding an applicant’s eligibility for asylum is reviewed to determine whether it is supported by substantial evidence. Ali v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 780, 784 (9th Cir.2005). Under that standard, the IJ’s decision must be upheld unless the record would compel any reasonable factfinder to reach an opposite conclusion. Id.

The government argues that this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain certain of Chen’s arguments because Chen failed to exhaust them before the BIA. But Chen raised all of the relevant arguments in his notice of appeal to the BIA. This is sufficient to satisfy the exhaustion requirement and preserve these arguments for appellate review. Thomas v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 1177, 1183 (9th Cir.2005).

*11 Chen first contends that he is eligible for asylum because…