WEI LI, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.
Decided: December 18, 2019
Before: BOGGS,** BEA, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Dennis James Eoffe, Law Office of Dennis Eoffe, Alhambra, CA, for Petitioner. OIL, Suzanne N. Nardone, Esquire, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, David Nicholas Harling, Trial U.S. Department of Justice office of Immigration Litigation Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Wei Li, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal from the order of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying an application for asylum.1 We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant the petition for review and remand to the BIA for reconsideration in light of our intervening opinion in Guo v. Sessions, 897 F.3d 1208 (9th Cir. 2018).
Guo also concerned a Christian Chinese national, and we granted a petition for review of the BIA's decision denying the petitioner's asylum application. Id. at 1217. We concluded, based on similar (albeit not identical) evidence, that “the scope and seriousness of the government's practices” compelled a finding of past religious persecution. Id. at 1211–12, 1215–16. We also distinguished Guo's circumstances from those in Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014 (9th Cir. 2006), in which we denied a petition for review from a Chinese Christian claiming religious persecution, id. at 1022.
The government argues that this case is controlled by Gu, not Guo. Because the BIA did not have the benefit of Guo when it rendered its decision, we remand to allow the BIA to address in the first instance the application of Guo to Li's asylum application.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
1. Li also applied for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The BIA found that Li waived any challenge to the IJ's denial of withholding of removal and CAT protection, and Li's petition for review does not argue otherwise.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.