Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8630114
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Chang Hao Xu v. Gonzales
No. 8630114 · Decided April 19, 2007
No. 8630114·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
April 19, 2007
Citation
No. 8630114
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Chang Hao Xu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for substantial evidence, Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 862 (9th Cir.2001), we deny the petition for review. Because Xu was not mistreated by the Chinese government, and fails to show that the government would impute a political opinion to him, his asylum claim fails. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Because Xu failed to establish that he was eligible for asylum, he necessarily failed to establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Cruz-Navarro v. INS, 232 F.3d 1024, 1031 (9th Cir.2000). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Chang Hao Xu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Chang Hao Xu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal.
02INS, 254 F.3d 859, 862 (9th Cir.2001), we deny the petition for review.
03Because Xu was not mistreated by the Chinese government, and fails to show that the government would impute a political opinion to him, his asylum claim fails.
04Because Xu failed to establish that he was eligible for asylum, he necessarily failed to establish eligibility for withholding of removal.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Chang Hao Xu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Chang Hao Xu v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 19, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8630114 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.