In re Castro-Lopez

9 Cited authorities

Auer v. Robbins
519 U.S. 452 (1997) Cited 2,340 times 90 Legal Analyses
Holding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"
Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council
490 U.S. 332 (1989) Cited 1,391 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding NEPA does not require a "worst case analysis"
Cuadra v. Gonzales
417 F.3d 947 (8th Cir. 2005) Cited 14 times
Holding that the prior statutory scheme limited the period for which good moral character had to be shown to the period before the filing of the application, but not confronting the statutory amendments by the stop-time rule and the Board's subsequent decision in Ortega–Cabrera
Fong v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
308 F.2d 191 (9th Cir. 1962) Cited 16 times
In Fong, Louie King Fong’s eligibility for suspension of deportation hinged, as does Campos-Hernandez’s, on whether the ten-year physical presence requirement ran from when he first became deportable in 1944, or from the last act or status making him deportable, which occurred in 1953.
Patsis v. Immigration Naturalization Service
337 F.2d 733 (8th Cir. 1964) Cited 8 times
No. 17316. October 29, 1964. Albert J. Yonke, Kansas City, Mo., made argument for petitioner and filed brief. Don Bennett, Atty., Immigration Naturalization Dept., Washington, D.C., made argument for respondent and filed brief with Kenneth C. Shelver, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C. and Richard D. FitzGibbon, U.S. Atty., and Grove G. Sweet, Asst. U.S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo. Before VOGEL, MATTHES and BLACKMUN, Circuit Judges. BLACKMUN, Circuit Judge. Athanasios Patsis petitions for review
Gagliano v. Immigration Naturalization Serv
353 F.2d 922 (2d Cir. 1965) Cited 5 times
Concluding that the continuous physical presence requirement was "somewhat ambiguous" and "allow[ed] for two possible constructions"
Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
8 U.S.C. § 1182 Cited 9,741 times 66 Legal Analyses
Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"
Section 1254 - Repealed
8 U.S.C. § 1254 Cited 1,130 times 1 Legal Analyses
Describing suspension-of-deportation eligibility
Section 1240.66 - Eligibility for special rule cancellation of removal
8 C.F.R. § 1240.66 Cited 80 times 1 Legal Analyses
Barring persecutors from special rule cancellation of removal

In re Castro-Lopez

9 Cited authorities

Holding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"

Holding NEPA does not require a "worst case analysis"

Holding that the prior statutory scheme limited the period for which good moral character had to be shown to the period before the filing of the application, but not confronting the statutory amendments by the stop-time rule and the Board's subsequent decision in Ortega–Cabrera

In Fong, Louie King Fong’s eligibility for suspension of deportation hinged, as does Campos-Hernandez’s, on whether the ten-year physical presence requirement ran from when he first became deportable in 1944, or from the last act or status making him deportable, which occurred in 1953.

Concluding that the continuous physical presence requirement was "somewhat ambiguous" and "allow[ed] for two possible constructions"

Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

Describing suspension-of-deportation eligibility

Barring persecutors from special rule cancellation of removal