Lin v. Mukasey, No. 08-60099 (5th Cir. 2008)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 08-60099 Summary Calendar November 5, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk YING LIN Petitioner v. MICHAEL B MUKASEY, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A95 709 794 Before WIENER, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Petitioner Ying Lin, a native and citizen of People s Republic of China, has filed a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) order denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). In rejecting Lin s application, the BIA found that Lin lacked credibility. On a petition for review of a BIA decision, we review the factual findings for substantial evidence. Ozdemir v. INS, 46 F.3d 6, 7 (5th Cir. 1994). Under * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 08-60099 the substantial evidence standard, we will affirm the BIA s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Id. at 8. The applicant has the burden of showing that the evidence is so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could reach a contrary conclusion. Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). The decision of the BIA to reject Lin s testimony as incredible is based on a reasonable interpretation of the record and therefore is supported by substantial evidence. See Chun v. INS, 40 F.3d 76, 79 (5th Cir. 1994). As the record does not compel a contrary conclusion, Lin s asylum claim fails. See Mwembie v. Gonzales, 443 F.3d 405, 410 (5th Cir. 2006). The adverse credibility determination also defeats Lin s withholding of removal and CAT claims. See Mikhael v. INS, 115 F.3d 299, 306 (5th Cir. 1997); Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 907 (5th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, Lin s petition for review is DENIED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.