Filed: Apr. 26, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: 16-2697 Zhang v. Sessions BIA Balasquide, IJ A087 857 725 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH T
Summary: 16-2697 Zhang v. Sessions BIA Balasquide, IJ A087 857 725 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH TH..
More
16-2697
Zhang v. Sessions
BIA
Balasquide, IJ
A087 857 725
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
SUMMARY ORDER
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED
ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE
PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT
FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE
(WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY
OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for
2 the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States
3 Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the
4 26th day of April, two thousand seventeen.
5
6 PRESENT:
7 JOHN M. WALKER, JR.,
8 JOSÉ A. CABRANES,
9 BARRINGTON D. PARKER,
10 Circuit Judges.
11 _____________________________________
12
13 XUIFANG ZHANG,
14 Petitioner,
15
16 v. 16-2697
17 NAC
18 JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, UNITED
19 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL,
20 Respondent.
21 _____________________________________
22
23 FOR PETITIONER: John Chang, New York, NY.
24
25 FOR RESPONDENT: Joyce R. Branda, Acting Assistant
26 Attorney General; Melissa
27 Neiman-Kelting, Assistant Director;
28 Anthony J. Messuri, Trial Attorney,
29 Office of Immigration Litigation,
30 U.S. Department of Justice,
31 Washington, DC.
1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a
2 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby
3 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is
4 DENIED.
5 Petitioner Xuifang Zhang, a native and citizen of the
6 People’s Republic of China, seeks review of a July 11, 2016,
7 decision of the BIA that affirmed a May 15, 2015, decision of
8 an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Zhang’s application for
9 asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention
10 Against Torture (“CAT”). The BIA also declined to remand the
11 case to the IJ. In re Xuifang Zhang, No. A087 857 725 (B.I.A.
12 July 11, 2016), aff’g No. A087 857 725 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City
13 May 15, 2015). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the
14 underlying facts and procedural history in this case.
15 Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed the
16 decision of the IJ as supplemented by the BIA. See Yan Chen
17 v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). In this case,
18 the agency made the following two (alternate) findings to deny
19 Zhang’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT
20 relief: (1) she was not credible based on inconsistencies in
21 her evidence; and (2) she failed to demonstrate a well-founded
22 fear of persecution on account of her religious practice. In
23 addition, on appeal, the BIA denied what it construed as a motion
2
1 to remand, finding that Zhang failed to submit previously
2 unavailable evidence in support of such motion. As the
3 Government argues, Zhang, through counsel, does not challenge
4 the agency’s dispositive bases for denying her application for
5 relief or her motion to remand.
6 A petitioner’s brief to this Court must contain her
7 “contentions and the reasons for them, with citations to the
8 authorities and parts of the record on which the [petitioner]
9 relies.” Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A). “Issues not
10 sufficiently argued in the briefs are considered waived and
11 normally will not be addressed on appeal,” Norton v. Sam’s Club,
12 145 F.3d 114, 117 (2d Cir. 1998); Yueqing Zhang v. Gonzales,
13
426 F.3d 540, 541 n.1, 545 n.7 (2d Cir. 2005), in the absence
14 of manifest injustice, LNC Invs., Inc. v. Nat’l Westminster
15 Bank, N.J.,
308 F.3d 169, 176 n.8 (2d Cir. 2002). Because Zhang
16 fails to challenge the agency’s dispositive findings—the
17 adverse credibility determination and conclusion that remand
18 was not warranted absent new evidence—we deem any such arguments
19 waived. See Yueqing
Zhang, 426 F.3d at 541 n.1, 545 n.7.
20 No manifest injustice results from denying Zhang’s
21 petition on waiver grounds. The agency reasonably relied on
22 multiple record inconsistencies to find Zhang not credible,
23 which was dispositive of all claims for relief, see 8 U.S.C.
3
1 § 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii); Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148, 156-57
2 (2d Cir. 2006), and Zhang did not submit any evidence before
3 the BIA as required to support a motion to remand based on new
4 evidence, see Li Yong Cao v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice,
421 F.3d
5 149, 156 (2d Cir. 2005).
6 For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is
7 DENIED. As we have completed our review, any stay of removal
8 that the Court previously granted in this petition is VACATED,
9 and any pending motion for a stay of removal in this petition
10 is DISMISSED as moot. Any pending request for oral argument
11 in this petition is DENIED in accordance with Federal Rule of
12 Appellate Procedure 34(a)(2), and Second Circuit Local Rule
13 34.1(b).
14 FOR THE COURT:
15 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
4
