Recently, the elevated levels of seismicity activities in Western Canada have been demonstrated to be linked to hydraulic fracturing operations that developed unconventional resources. The underlying triggering mechanisms of hydraulic fracturing-induced seismicity are still uncertain. The interactions of well stimulation and geology-geomechanical-hydrological features need to be investigated comprehensively. The linear poroelasticity theory was utilized to guide coupled poroelastic modeling and to quantify the physical process during hydraulic fracturing. The integrated analysis is first conducted to characterize the mechanical features and fluid flow behavior. The finite-element simulation is then conducted by coupling Darcy's law and solid mechanics to quantify the perturbation of pore pressure and poroelastic stress in the seismogenic fault zone. Finally, the Mohr-coulomb failure criterion is utilized to determine the spatial-temporal faults activation and reveal the trigger mechanisms of induced earthquakes. The mitigation strategy was proposed accordingly to reduce the potential seismic hazards near this region. A case study of ML 4.18 earthquake in the East Shale Basin was utilized to demonstrate the applicability of the coupled modeling and numerical simulation. Results showed that one inferred fault cut through the Duvernay formation with the strike of NE20°. The fracture half-length of two wells owns an average value of 124 m. The brittleness index deriving from the velocity logging data was estimated to be a relatively higher value in the Duvernay formation, indicating a geomechanical bias of stimulated formation for the fault activation. The coupled poroelastic simulation was conducted, showing that the hydrologic connection between seismogenic faults and stimulated well was established by the end of the 38th stage completion for the east horizontal well. The simulated coulomb failure stress surrounding the fault reached a maximum of 4.15 MPa, exceeding the critical value to cause the fault slip. Hence the poroelastic effects on the inferred fault were responsible for the fault activation and triggered the subsequent ML 4.18 earthquake. It is essential to optimize the stimulation site selection near the existing faults to reduce risks of future seismic hazards near the East Shale Basin.