This chapter aims to reformulate Higginbotham’s (Linguistic Inquiry 14:395–420, 1983) linking theory of anaphora with a movement theory that is developed on the basis of Abe’s (A movement theory of anaphora. De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin, 2014) work. I propose a way to distinguish coreferential from bound variable anaphora in terms of Set-Merge and Pair-Merge. By imposing minimal Search on Set-Merge, we derive the fact that bound variable anaphora requires c-command relationship. I also propose a way of deriving binding conditions under our movement theory: I follow Kayne (Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program. Blackwell, Oxford, 133–166, 2002) and Abe (movement theory of anaphora. De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin, 2014) in deriving Condition C effects from the ban on downward movement. This chapter addresses Lasnik’s (Linguistic Analysis 2: 1–22, 1976) problem, which apparently indicates the necessity of non-coreference rules like Condition C, arguing that the crucial example that supports Lasnik’s view can be explained in terms of cyclicity imposed on how the relevant anaphoric relations are established via Move. Further, this chapter discusses various possibilities of connecting pronouns to their antecedents via Move in Condition B violating environments, arguing that unwanted possibilities are properly excluded by invoking minimal Search and Minimize chain links (MCL) under Abe’s (Minimalist syntax for quantifier raising, topicalization and focus movement: A search and float approach for internal merge. Springer, Berlin, 2016) Search and Float framework. Finally, this chapter deals with Condition A, arguing that the c-command requirement and the A-binding requirement on anaphors are derived from their inherent property as bound variables, and that their locality effects are derived from MCL.