On December 7, 1993, numerous citizens of the People's Republic of China who were detained pending deportation after being denied asylum, brought suit in the Eastern District of New York, challenging the standard used by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") to evaluate asylum applications based ...
read more >
On December 7, 1993, numerous citizens of the People's Republic of China who were detained pending deportation after being denied asylum, brought suit in the Eastern District of New York, challenging the standard used by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") to evaluate asylum applications based on coercive family planning practices in China. Plaintiffs sought declaratory, injunctive, mandamus, and habeas relief. Plaintiffs also sought a TRO, a preliminary injunction and class certification. The original plaintiffs also sought leave to add additional parties to the action.
The government opposed the relief plaintiffs sought and moved to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
On September 8, 1994, the District Court (Senior Judge Charles P. Sifton) granted defendants' motion to dismiss, except for the claims of two plaintiffs, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiffs' motions for a TRO, a preliminary injunction, class certification and leave to amend the pleadings were denied. Wang v. Reno, 862 F.Supp. 801 (E.D.N.Y. 1994). One plaintiff appealed, but the appeal was subsequently withdrawn.
We have no further information on the case.
Dan Dalton - 10/23/2007
compress summary
