Filed: Jun. 10, 2009
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: REVISED June 10, 2009 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 8, 2009 No. 08-60589 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk RU LIAN Petitioner v. ERIC H HOLDER, JR, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A200 038 254 Before REAVLEY, WIENER, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* After briefing was complete in this matter, the Supreme Court decided Negusie v.
Summary: REVISED June 10, 2009 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 8, 2009 No. 08-60589 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk RU LIAN Petitioner v. ERIC H HOLDER, JR, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A200 038 254 Before REAVLEY, WIENER, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* After briefing was complete in this matter, the Supreme Court decided Negusie v. H..
More
REVISED June 10, 2009
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 8, 2009
No. 08-60589
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
RU LIAN
Petitioner
v.
ERIC H HOLDER, JR, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL
Respondent
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A200 038 254
Before REAVLEY, WIENER, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
After briefing was complete in this matter, the Supreme Court decided
Negusie v. Holder,
129 S. Ct. 1159 (2009). The Court remanded to the Board of
Immigration Appeals the issue of whether there is a duress defense to the
“persecutor bar” to asylum. Because Ru Lian’s right to consideration for asylum
may be impacted by Negusie, we GRANT the petition for review, VACATE the
BIA’s decision, and REMAND. The BIA should reconsider Ru Lian’s claims in
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 08-60589
light of its eventual decision in Negusie and make such further disposition of the
case as that determination requires.
2