 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Chu Ying Kwao v. United States Citizenship & Immigration Serv., No. 04-4747-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where BIA denied a motion to reopen based on its finding that an alien did not provide sufficient evidence of the bona fides of her marriage, BIA erred as a matter of law because BIA did not indicate that it considered INS's position that alien established prima facie eligibility for adjustment of status or other documentation of alien's marriage.
|
|||||
| Del Pilar Delgado v. Mukasey, Docket No. 05-4393-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review was granted. Neither BIA nor IJ considered whether asylum seeker who was kidnapped in order to set up computer network of terrorist organization, and who refused to cooperate further with that organization, had a reasonable fear of future persecution on basis of imputed political opinion: opposition to terrorist organization.
|
|||||
| Fong Chen v. Mukasey, 06-1010-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In reviewing the denial of Chinese asylum applicant's untimely motion to reopen filed under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii), court remanded and ordered BIA to consider two decisions in which documents regarding adoption of new family planning policy in China were discussed to see if applicant had produced enough evidence of changed country conditions.
|
|||||
| Jia Liu Liu v. Bd. of Immigration Appeals, 07-0931-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(b)(4)(B) supported an adverse credibility finding to deny asylum and related relief for a Chinese alien because his testimony contradicted his asylum application as to his frequent hospital visits, and there was a negative demeanor finding, which was based on the alien's vague and hesitant testimony.
|
|||||
| Meng Jun Wang v. Mukasey, No. 03-40290-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Chinese alien, who had departed the country illegally, did not show that he was a member of a particular social group of those who had departed China illegally for purposes of refugee status under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(a)(42), and withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1231(b)(3)(A) because such a group required a common immutable characteristic.
|
|||||
| Parker v. Duncan, No. 04-0562-pr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Patane v. Clark, Docket No. 06-3446-cv,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in dismissing Title VII, and state and local law retaliation-related claims as employee sufficiently alleged defendants were aware of her complaints about harassment by supervisor and another defendant; supervisor stripped her of most all of her secretarial duties; and there was a causal connection between two occurrences.
|
|||||
| United States v. Juwa, Docket No. 06-2716-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court impermissibly assumed that multiple charges on a state indictment were true without an admission by defendant or preponderance of evidence; thus, it committed procedural error when it did not adequately explain its reasoning behind imposing improper upward departure on defendant's sentence, as required by 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(c)(2).
|
|||||
| United States v. Molina, No: 06-2191-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
