Set Text Size:

S

S

S

2000 - 1999

  • CA9: State Rehabilitative Statute Found to Cure Removal Ground (8/1/2000)
    The 9th Circuit finds that the convictions of individuals who received the benefit of state rehabilitative statutes are extenguished. As a result, they are not subject to removal.
    AILA Doc. No. 00080104.
  • CA9 Rebuffs Soriano (12/28/1999)
    The court refused to follow Soriano, holding that AEDPA §440(d) does not apply to deportation cases pending when AEDPA was passed, and that AEDPA and IIRAIRA do not repeal habeas relief under 28 USC §2241.
    AILA Doc. No. 99122801.
  • CA9: CSS to be Reheard En Banc (12/17/1999)
    The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to rehear the CSS 'late amnesty' case en banc.
    AILA Doc. No. 99121777.
  • CA9: Molina-Cardenas v. INS (4/30/1999)
    The BIA held that Molina-Cardenas failed to establish that he either suffered past persecution or had a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of one of the five statutorily protected grounds.
    AILA Doc. No. 99043093.
  • CA9: Jaime-Martinez v. INS (4/30/1999)
    We reverse the BIA's decision, because the evidence in the record compels the conclusion that Jaime-Martinez has a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of political opinion, and that such persecution is more likely than not to occur, should he return to E1 Salvador.
    AILA Doc. No. 99043091.
  • CA9: Briones v. INS (4/30/1999)
    Petitioner, asks us to grant his petition for review of a decision by the BIA denying his request for political asylum and withholding of deportation under sections 208(a) and 243(h) of the INA. He claims the evidence he presented to an Immigration Judge compels the conclusion that he has a well-founded fear of being persecuted in the Philippines.
    AILA Doc. No. 99043090.
  • CA9: Borja v. INS (4/30/1999)
    Reverses Matter of T-M-B-, Int. Dec. 3307 (BIA 1997).
    AILA Doc. No. 99043090.
  • CA9: Hernandez-Acosta v. INS (4/28/1999)
    In this case, despite the IJ's adverse credibility findings, the BIA refrained from making a credibility determination. Instead, it assumed arguendo that Hernandez's testimony at his deportation hearing was credible and found that this testimony established that he had been the victim of persecution in El Salvador based upon an imputed political opinion.
    AILA Doc. No. 99042891.
  • CA9: Leiva-Montalvo v. INS (4/22/1999)
    Leiva-Montalvo, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions this court for review of a final order of the BIA dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Judge's denial of his application for asylum and withholding of deportation. We grant the petition for review.
    AILA Doc. No. 99042290.
  • CA9: NLRB v. Kokkka (3/17/1999)
    This appeal presents the question of whether an employer may refuse to bargain with certified representatives of its employees because some of the voting employees were undocumented aliens. We hold that an employer may not do so, and grant the National Labor Relations Board's petition for enforcement of its cease and desist order.
  • CA9: Qaumi v. INS (1/29/1999)
    While the petitioner 'offered sufficient evidence to establish a material change in country conditions, he did not establish a prima facie case that the change would likely subject him to individualized persecution.' The petition is denied.
    AILA Doc. No. 98-70077.
  • CA9: Hyseni v. INS (1/4/1999)
    Because the record is not fully developed with respect to whether Hyseni is entitled to asylum for humanitarian reasons, the Courth remands for a determination by the BIA of whether Hyseni's past persecution warrants a grant of asylum.
    AILA Doc. No. 97-71030.
  • CA9: Campos-Sanchez v. INS (1/6/1999)
    Leonardo Campos-Sanchez petitions this court for review of a final order of the BIA denying his request for asylum and withholding of deportation. The court concludes that the BIA erred and remand the case.
    AILA Doc. No. 97-70990.
  • CA9: Hodgers-Durgin v. Border Patrol (1/12/1999)
    Plaintiffs, suing on behalf of themselves and a class of persons, allege that the U.S. Border Patrol routinely stops Arizona motorists without reasonable suspicion, in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Plaintiffs appeal from the district court's denial of class certification and grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants. Reversed in both respects and remanded for further proceedings.
    AILA Doc. No. 97-16449.