Lin v. Holder (unpub)
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by determining that Lin has not made an adequate showing that he would be forcibly sterilized. The BIA cited Matter of H-L-H- & Z-Y-Z-, 25 I. & N. Dec. 209 (BIA 2010), which held that family planning policies in Fujian province are likely to be enforced by fines and economic penalties rather than by forced sterilization. The BIA’s conclusions are supported by the record.
The BIA also did not abuse its discretion by determining that, although Lin might be fined for violating family planning policies, he did not make an adequate showing that he would be subjected to economic harm amounting to persecution, particularly given that he did not offer any evidence concerning his financial situation.
To the extent that the BIA rejected Lin’s government documents solely because they were not authenticated pursuant to regulation, this was error. Any error was harmless, however: although the BIA deemed the documents unauthenticated, the BIA nonetheless considered the documents and reasonably determined that they were inadequate to show that Lin or his wife would be subjected to forced sterilization.
The BIA’s holding that Lin failed to meet his burden for relief was supported by record evidence and is an independent ground on which the BIA may deny a motion to reopen. The Court therefore does not address Lin’s other arguments.