Wang v. Lynch, No. 14-4029 (6th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseWang entered the U.S. in 2006 as a nonimmigrant, authorized to remain until September. In November 2006, Wang appeared before an IJ, and after conceding removability, filed an application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. DHS argued that Wang’s asylum application was strikingly similar to several others. The IJ nonetheless determined that Wang’s testimony was credible, and granted Wang asylum based upon his practice of Christianity, stating that the similarities might have arisen from the applications’ having been prepared by the same person. The BIA reasoned that the IJ’s credibility analysis was insufficient and failed to adequately address the similarities between Wang’s application and the others. On remand, a new IJ found that Wang’s story contained implausible elements, such as Wang’s statement that he was under police surveillance but still managed to obtain a visa, which requires an interview, and was able to board a plane and leave China. Most damaging to Wang’s credibility were “two asylum applications from completely unrelated cases that share a striking number of very specific details.” The BIA and Sixth Circuit upheld denial of Wang’s petition. An IJ may properly take such remarkably similar facts as evidence that an applicant is not telling the truth, at least where the applicant has had a chance to explain the similarities.
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.