Legal Opinion
M-F-W- & L-G
Board of Immigration Appeals
Decided July 1, 2008No. ID 3625PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Cite as
24 I&N Dec. 633
(BIA 2008) Interim Decision #3625 Matter of M-F-W- & L-G-, Respondents Decided October 6 , 2008 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals (1) An act that thwarts the goals of China’s family planning policy, such as removing an intrauterine device (“IUD”) or failing to attend a mandatory gynecological appointment, may constitute “resistance” to the policy. (2) The insertion of an IUD does not rise to the level of harm necessary to constitute “persecution,” absent some aggravating circumstances. (3) Generally, where the…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Shi Liang Lin v. United States Department of JusticeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Tian-Yong Chen, A.K.A. Tian Yong Chen v. United States Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- Jian Xing Huang v. United States Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- Giuli Ivanishvili v. United States Department of Justice & Attorney General GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- S-Y-GBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2007
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- En Hui Huang v. Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- H-L-H- & Z-Y-ZBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2010
- Mei Fun Wong v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
- Fei Mei Cheng v. Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- Ming He v. Eric Holder, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.