Lianping Li v. Lynch’s Empirical Analysis
839 F.3d 144 · 2016
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Xiao Ji Chen v. United States Department of Justice · Ramsameachire v. Ashcroft · Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey · Lin Zhong v. United States Department of Justice · Huang v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“asylum application did not simply omit incidents of persecution. ... [but rather] described the same incidents of persecution differently”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gao v. Sessions“asylum applicants are not required to list every incident of persecution on their I-589 statement,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gao v. Sessions
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.