In re Laparra-DeLeon

30 Cited authorities

  1. Pereira v. Sessions

    138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018)   Cited 1,074 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an NTA that omitted the "time or place of the removal proceedings" failed to comply with the requirements of § 239 and was insufficient to trigger the so-called "stop-time rule" of INA § 240A(d)
  2. Yates v. United States

    574 U.S. 528 (2015)   Cited 529 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in light of a statute's illustrative list, "tangible object" covers "only objects one can use to record or preserve information, not all objects in the physical world"
  3. Niz-Chavez v. Garland

    141 S. Ct. 1474 (2021)   Cited 417 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an NTA must consist of "a single document" containing all requisite information
  4. Maniar v. Garland

    998 F.3d 235 (5th Cir. 2021)   Cited 55 times

    No. 18-60667 05-20-2021 Rajen MANIAR, Petitioner, v. Merrick GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Bradley Bruce Banias, Esq., Trial Attorney, Wasden Banias, L.L.C., Charleston, SC, for Petitioner. Joseph D. Hardy, Trial Attorney, Anthony Cardozo Payne, Assistant Director, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent. James C. Ho, Circuit Judge Bradley Bruce Banias, Esq., Trial Attorney, Wasden Banias, L.L.C., Charleston, SC, for Petitioner. Joseph D. Hardy, Trial

  5. Santos-Santos v. Barr

    917 F.3d 486 (6th Cir. 2019)   Cited 58 times
    Holding that Pereira did not divest courts of jurisdiction to consider removal proceedings after an NTA failed to include the relevant date and time because Pereira concerned the stop-time rule and addressed two statutory provisions that do not pertain to jurisdiction
  6. Chery v. Garland

    16 F.4th 980 (2d Cir. 2021)   Cited 43 times
    Concluding that a New York statute was divisible because the statute's plain text suggested "that either a 'hallucinogenic substance other than marijuana' or a 'narcotic substance' [must be] involved" in a violation, and distinguishing the indivisible statute in Harbin, which, by contrast, criminalized selling "controlled substance" generally
  7. Rodriguez v. Garland

    15 F.4th 351 (5th Cir. 2021)   Cited 42 times
    Allowing relief following a defective NTA under Niz-Chavez but not Pereira
  8. Banuelos-Galviz v. Barr

    953 F.3d 1176 (10th Cir. 2020)   Cited 35 times
    Holding that, before § 1229 repealed § 1252b, an OSC did not require the date and time of the hearing
  9. Tino v. Garland

    13 F.4th 708 (8th Cir. 2021)   Cited 30 times
    Failing to establish eligibility for asylum necessarily means failing to meet the requirements for withholding of removal
  10. Posos-Sanchez v. Garland

    3 F.4th 1176 (9th Cir. 2021)   Cited 29 times
    In Posos-Sanchez, the agency denied the petitioner's application for voluntary departure because he did not meet the one-year physical presence requirement.
  11. Section 1227 - Deportable aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1227   Cited 8,055 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Granting this discretion to the Attorney General
  12. Section 1229a - Removal proceedings

    8 U.S.C. § 1229a   Cited 6,436 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Granting a noncitizen the right to file one motion to reopen and providing that “the motion to reopen shall be filed within 90 days of the date of entry of a final administrative order of removal”
  13. Section 1229b - Cancellation of removal; adjustment of status

    8 U.S.C. § 1229b   Cited 5,214 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”
  14. Section 1229 - Initiation of removal proceedings

    8 U.S.C. § 1229   Cited 1,381 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing service by mail
  15. Section 1003.2 - Reopening or reconsideration before the Board of Immigration Appeals

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.2   Cited 7,822 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Granting power to Board
  16. Section 1003.23 - Reopening or reconsideration before the immigration court

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.23   Cited 343 times
    Setting a 90-day deadline for filing a motion to reopen if the applicant does not seek rescission of an in absentia removal order or fall into another exception listed in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)
  17. Section 1003.18 - Docket management

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.18   Cited 134 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring the NTA to include time, date, and place information only "where practicable"
  18. Section 1003.26 - In absentia hearings

    8 C.F.R. § 1003.26   Cited 44 times
    Requiring DHS to establish that written notice of the time and place of proceedings, as well as the consequences of failure to appear, was provided to the alien