 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Balde v. Gonzales, No. 06-1337,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review of decision denying request for withholding of removal was denied as substantial evidence, under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(b)(4)(B), supported BIA's determination that alien failed to present a credible claim for withholding of removal. Court lacked jurisdiction to review denial of asylum claim as untimely under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1158(a)(3).
|
|||||
| Brown v. Carilion Health Sys., No. 06-1642,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Edwards v. TRS Staffing Solutions, Inc., No. 06-2023,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ha Sim v. Gonzales, No. 06-1914,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where asylum applicant could not sustain his burden of proof on asylum claim by failing to establish a past or a well-founded fear of persecution, applicant was not entitled to withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1231(b)(3) because burden of proof for withholding of removal was higher than for asylum, even though facts to be proved were same.
|
|||||
| Hussain v. Gonzales, No. 05-2350,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien was statutorily prohibited from receiving an adjustment of status because he entered the U.S. illegally, even if the BIA improperly failed to consider motion to remand; thus, alien failed to make a prima facie case under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1255(a) that he was admissible, in accordance with 8 U.S.C.S. § 1182(a)(6), which governed inadmissibility.
|
|||||
| In re McClaren, No. 06-7194,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Magazine v. White, No. 06-7818,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Sonjong v. Gonzales, No. 06-1387,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Gibson, No. 06-7546,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 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. |
