In re Valenzuela

16 Cited authorities

  1. Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.

    519 U.S. 337 (1997)   Cited 2,525 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the term “employees” carries a different meaning in different sections of Title VII
  2. K Mart Corp. v. Cartier, Inc.

    486 U.S. 281 (1988)   Cited 806 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding a C.F.R. provision invalid because it conflicted with the unequivocal language of the statute
  3. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System v. Dimension Financial Corp.

    474 U.S. 361 (1986)   Cited 294 times
    Holding that “[t]he ‘plain purpose’ of legislation ... is determined in the first instance with reference to the plain language of the statute itself” and explaining that “[i]nvocation of the ‘plain purpose’ of legislation at the expense of the terms of the statute itself takes no account of the processes of compromise and, in the end, prevents the effectuation of congressional intent”
  4. Choin v. Mukasey

    537 F.3d 1116 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 24 times
    Considering the statutory scheme in interpreting the meaning of a term in the INA
  5. Markovski v. Gonzales

    486 F.3d 108 (4th Cir. 2007)   Cited 21 times
    Rejecting attempt of K visaholder to adjust his status based on a petition submitted by a potential employer
  6. Kalal v. Gonzales

    402 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 11 times
    Rejecting attempt of K visaholder to adjust his status based on marriage to a woman other than the one who filed the K visa petition for him
  7. Birdsong v. Holder

    641 F.3d 957 (8th Cir. 2011)   Cited 5 times
    Interpreting "seeks to enter" provision as ongoing requirement of maintaining status after admission
  8. Caraballo–Tavera v. Holder

    683 F.3d 49 (2d Cir. 2012)   Cited 1 times

    Docket No. 11–2517–ag. 2012-06-18 Diomares De Jesus CARABALLO–TAVERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., United States Attorney General, Respondent. Howard L. Baker, Wilens & Baker, P.C., New York, NY, for Petitioner Diomares De Jesus Caraballo–Tavera. Julia J. Tyler, Trial Attorney; Tony West, Assistant Attorney General; and Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director; Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent Eric H. Holder, Jr

  9. Section 1252 - Judicial review of orders of removal

    8 U.S.C. § 1252   Cited 43,219 times   37 Legal Analyses
    Holding court had no jurisdiction to review "any judgment regarding the granting of relief under section . . . 1229b"
  10. Section 1101 - Definitions

    8 U.S.C. § 1101   Cited 16,700 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status
  11. Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1182   Cited 9,902 times   69 Legal Analyses
    Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"
  12. Section 1229b - Cancellation of removal; adjustment of status

    8 U.S.C. § 1229b   Cited 5,203 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Granting the Attorney General discretion to cancel the removal of an alien who has “been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty by a ... parent who is ... a United States citizen”
  13. Section 1255 - Adjustment of status of nonimmigrant to that of person admitted for permanent residence

    8 U.S.C. § 1255   Cited 2,894 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Listing classes of nonimmigrants, such as students and tourists
  14. Section 1229c - Voluntary departure

    8 U.S.C. § 1229c   Cited 1,019 times
    Imposing statutory penalties for failure to depart
  15. Section 1240.26 - Voluntary departure-authority of the Executive Office for Immigration Review

    8 C.F.R. § 1240.26   Cited 316 times
    Providing noncitizen must concede removability to be eligible for voluntary departure
  16. Section 1245.1 - Eligibility

    8 C.F.R. § 1245.1   Cited 114 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Providing that "[a]ny alien who was not admitted or paroled following inspection by an immigration officer" is "ineligible to apply for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident alien"