From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Maturo v. Immigration and Naturalization Serv

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Dec 11, 1968
404 F.2d 337 (2d Cir. 1968)

Opinion

No. 168, Docket 32588.

Argued November 8, 1968.

Decided December 11, 1968.

John A. Arcudi, Bridgeport, Conn., for petitioner.

Daniel Riesel, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty., New York City (Robert M. Morgenthau, U.S. Atty., for the Southern District of New York, New York City, on the brief), for respondent.

Before MEDINA and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges, and LEVET, District Judge.

Of the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.


Petitioner was found deportable at a hearing conducted on July 8, 1965. He has remained in this country, however, by resorting to various procedural expedients. He now seeks to reopen his deportation hearing in order to obtain status as a permanent resident. Both the Special Inquiry Officer and the Board of Immigration Appeals denied his motion because he was statutorily ineligible as there were no immigrant visas immediately available or likely to become so in the near future. See 8 U.S.C. § 1255. We agree. Moreover, the record is absolutely barren of any evidence or facts to support petitioner's claim that this determination was an abuse of discretion because others similarly situated have been allowed to remain.

The petition to review is denied and the statutory stay is vacated.


Summaries of

Maturo v. Immigration and Naturalization Serv

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Dec 11, 1968
404 F.2d 337 (2d Cir. 1968)
Case details for

Maturo v. Immigration and Naturalization Serv

Case Details

Full title:Giuseppe MATURO, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Dec 11, 1968

Citations

404 F.2d 337 (2d Cir. 1968)

Citing Cases

Schieber v. Immigration Naturalization Serv

Absent a showing of abuse of discretion, we will not disturb the Board's exercise of discretion in refusing…