Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
WEI LI, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM ***
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.
FOOTNOTES
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.
Response sent, thank you
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.
Docket No: No. 17-70051
Decided: December 18, 2019
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)