From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Esomo v. Barrows

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Jul 25, 2008
3:07-CV-1814-K (N.D. Tex. Jul. 25, 2008)

Summary

In Esomo, the court concluded that it had limited jurisdiction to review a naturalization application because Saba-Bakare did not decide the "specific jurisdictional question" of whether section 1429 divests district courts of jurisdiction to review naturalization applications under 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c).

Summary of this case from Khodari v. Napolitano

Opinion

3:07-CV-1814-K.

July 25, 2008


ORDER


United States Magistrate Judge William F. Sanderson, Jr., made findings, conclusions and a recommendation in this case. No objections were filed. The District Court reviewed the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the Court accepts the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Esomo v. Barrows

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Jul 25, 2008
3:07-CV-1814-K (N.D. Tex. Jul. 25, 2008)

In Esomo, the court concluded that it had limited jurisdiction to review a naturalization application because Saba-Bakare did not decide the "specific jurisdictional question" of whether section 1429 divests district courts of jurisdiction to review naturalization applications under 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c).

Summary of this case from Khodari v. Napolitano
Case details for

Esomo v. Barrows

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER L. ESOMO, #A74-407-696, Plaintiff, v. ANGELA K. BARROWS, et…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division

Date published: Jul 25, 2008

Citations

3:07-CV-1814-K (N.D. Tex. Jul. 25, 2008)

Citing Cases

Yanqui Xue v. Tarango

See id. Furthermore, courts—including this Court—have determined § 1429 only restricts USCIS's authority and…

Singhania v. Holder

Subsequent decisions in this district have also required dismissal without prejudice for lack of subject…