§

In the Matter of Patel

19 I&N Dec. 394 (B.I.A. 1986)
In the Matter of Patel

13 Cited authorities

  1. Woodby v. Immigration Service

    385 U.S. 276 (1966)   Cited 753 times
    Holding that "no deportation order may be entered unless it is found by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence that the facts alleged as grounds for deportation are true"

  2. INS v. Rios-Pineda

    471 U.S. 444 (1985)   Cited 189 times
    Holding that the BIA may discount evidence of seven years' presence in its assessment of eligibility for suspension when presence was maintained through meritless appeals

  3. Banta v. United States

    434 U.S. 819 (1977)   Cited 150 times
    Holding that defective paneling sold was one occurrence because exposure during the sale and delivery process was continuous and repeated

  4. Acevedo v. Immigration Naturalization Serv

    538 F.2d 918 (2d Cir. 1976)   Cited 41 times
    Holding petition seeking review of motion to reopen deportation hearing, in the absence of new evidence, as without merit under § 1927 since petitioner was not entitled to reopen except on showing of significant new evidence

  5. Ballenilla-Gonzalez v. Im. Nat. Serv

    546 F.2d 515 (2d Cir. 1976)   Cited 27 times
    Holding that "[i]mplicit" in the requirement that the party seeking reopening of proceedings "state the new facts to be proved at the reopened hearing" is the "the assumption that no such motion will be granted unless the facts alleged would be sufficient, if proved, to change the result"

  6. Der-Rong Chour v. Immigration Natu. Serv

    578 F.2d 464 (2d Cir. 1978)   Cited 24 times
    Holding that “the approval of the [petitioner's] I–130 petition [did not] permit him to remain in the United States”

  7. Riasati v. I.N.S.

    738 F.2d 1115 (10th Cir. 1984)   Cited 7 times

    No. 83-1255. July 16, 1984. David M. Doering, Denver, Colo., for petitioner. Richard K. Willard, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Thomas W. Hussey and Donald A. Couvillon, Attys., Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent. Petition for review from the Board of Immigration Appeals. Before SETH, Chief Judge, and LOGAN and SEYMOUR, Circuit Judges. LOGAN, Circuit Judge. After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel has

  8. Contreras-Aragon v. I.N.S.

    789 F.2d 777 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 4 times
    Holding that a Court of Appeals has no power to grant such relief

  9. Fan Wan Keung v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

    434 F.2d 301 (2d Cir. 1970)   Cited 8 times
    In Fan Wan Keung we held that the Service's refusal to grant a second permission voluntarily to depart after the alien had engaged in dilatory tactics to delay deportation was not an abuse of discretion.

  10. Panagopoulos v. I.N.S.

    434 F.2d 602 (1st Cir. 1970)   Cited 5 times

    Nos. 7677, 7678. November 12, 1970. Samuel A. Bithoney, Boston, Mass., on petitions to review. Herbert F. Travers, Jr., U.S. Atty., and Willie J. Davis, Asst. U.S. Atty., on motions for summary action. Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, McENTEE and COFFIN, Circuit Judges. ALDRICH, Chief Judge. In these two cases the Immigration and Naturalization Service, in response to petitions for review filed pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a, has moved for summary judgments of dismissal under Local Rule 6. The petitioners

  11. Section 1255 - Adjustment of status of nonimmigrant to that of person admitted for permanent residence

    8 U.S.C. § 1255   Cited 2,895 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Listing classes of nonimmigrants, such as students and tourists

  12. Section 1251 - Transferred

    8 U.S.C. § 1251   Cited 2,159 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Delineating crimes that make alien deportable