 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Kurniawan v. Gonzales, No. 05-1859-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien's petition for review was denied because his asylum claim was not subject to judicial review, the IJ did not err by denying withholding of removal as petitioner failed to show that he would have been persecuted in Indonesia, and the IJ properly applied the "more likely than not" standard regarding future persecution.
|
|||||
| Qi Di Zhang v. Gonzales, No. 05-1191-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien's petition for review was denied because the rejection of his asylum claim on the basis of inconsistencies between his arrival interview and his asylum testimony was supported by substantial evidence, and substantial evidence supported the finding that the alien did not testify credibly as to his persecution as a member of Falun Gong.
|
|||||
| Qi Zhong Zheng v. Gonzales, No. 04-4593-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA did not abuse discretion in finding that alien's third motion to reopen did not fall within any recognized exception to time and numerical limitations under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1229a. Motion was filed 16 months after BIA dismissed underlying appeal and IJ already considered claim that alien would be persecuted for failing to pay family planning fine.
|
|||||
| Shah v. Gonzales, Nos. 04-4664-ag (L); 04-5612-ag (CON) NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review of the denial of a motion to reopen was denied because the IJ did not abuse his discretion when he determined that petitioner failed to prove that country conditions had changed in Pakistan so as to justify reopening his removal proceedings.
|
|||||
| Tepper v. Bendell, No. 04-5860,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Xiang Chen v. Bd. of Immigration Appeals, No. 04-4641-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review of a BIA decision was denied because the IJ's adverse credibility findings were supported by substantial evidence and petitioner's explanation about the discrepancies in the evidence was insufficient to compel a reasonable fact-finder to credit his testimony.
|
|||||
| Yu Chen Twan v. Bd. of Immigration Appeals, No. 05-1766-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, February 28, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The alien relied on evidence of his changed personal circumstances--his marriage and the birth of his four children--to overcome the time requirement in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2); the alien failed to demonstrate that, since the close of his immigration proceedings, circumstances in China had changed to the extent that he qualified for asylum.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
