§
In re M-A-F

8 Cited authorities

  1. Shrestha v. Holder

    590 F.3d 1034 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 1,768 times
    Holding that adverse credibility determinations must be based on "specific and cogent reasons" supported by "specific instances in the record that support a conclusion that the factor undermines credibility."

  2. Dhital v. Mukasey

    532 F.3d 1044 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 248 times
    Holding that "the petitioner must demonstrate that he would be subject to a 'particularized threat of torture' " (quoting Lanza v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 917, 936 (9th Cir. 2004))

  3. Sagaydak v. Gonzales

    405 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 237 times
    Holding that the BIA is not free to ignore arguments raised by a petitioner

  4. Yuan v. Attorney General

    642 F.3d 420 (3d Cir. 2011)   Cited 102 times
    Holding that "harmless error analysis should apply in immigration cases"

  5. Vahora v. Holder

    641 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 51 times
    Holding that the petitioner demonstrated changed circumstances in part because he presented evidence that increased rioting in his home country "directly impacted" his family "in a very serious fashion"

  6. Section 1158 - Asylum

    8 U.S.C. § 1158   Cited 10,716 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding a "pattern or practice" of persecution requires it be "systemic, pervasive, or organized"

  7. 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”

  8. Section 208.4 - Filing the application

    8 C.F.R. § 208.4   Cited 303 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing "ineffective assistance of counsel" as one "extraordinary circumstance" and setting forth the requirements