In a recent published decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) addressed the proper procedure for providing corroborating evidence in any asylum case.  The Board determined that an Immigration Judge is not required to identify the specific corroborating evidence at the merits hearing that would be considered persuasive under the facts of the case to meet the applicant’s burden of proof, nor is the judge required to grant an automatic continuance for the applicant to present that corroborating evidence at a future merits hearing.  Instead, if an applicant requests a continuance to secure corroborating evidence, an IJ must determine whether good cause exists to continue the case.  The Board suggested that a continuance for an additional merits hearing might be appropriate where the Immigration Judge determines that that the applicant was not aware of a unique piece of evidence that is essential to meeting the burden of proof.  The Board also recognized that its decision is in tension with Ninth Circuit's decision in Ren v. Holder, which may require an Immigration Judge to give advance notice of the specific evidence necessary to establish the claim and an automatic continuance to obtain such evidence.

On a more lighthearted note, the Board recognized a fact that should be obvious: wikipedia articles have almost no indicia of reliability.

The full text of Matter of L-A-C- can be found here: