Naranjo-Aguilera v. Immigration & Naturalization Service’s Empirical Analysis
30 F.3d 1106 · 1994
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Kulvir Singh Barapind v. Janet Reno, Attorney General (2000), Alonso Antonio Barahona Gomez v. Janet Reno (1999)
17 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1395F (§ 1814 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 5 U.S.C. § 701 · 8 U.S.C. § 1105A (§ 106 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1160 (§ 210 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1255A (§ 245a of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Doerr v. Doerr · Bowen v. Michigan Academy of Family Physicians · Reno v. Catholic Social Services, Inc. · McNary v. Haitian Refugee Center, Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]here shall be no ... judicial review of a determination respecting an application for adjustment of status under this section except in accordance with this subsection”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[p]etitioners appealing orders of deportation routinely bring statutory and constitutional challenges to INS regulations and policies.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1118, 1999 Daily Journal D.A.R. 1391 Alonso Antonio Barahona-Gomez Carmen Victoria Vazquez De Barahona Alonso Antonio Barahona-Vasquez Brenda Verzosa Dino Verzosa Humberto Javier-Rivas Bosco Guillermo Rivas Carole Beltran Santiago Ramon Sequeira Graciela De Los Angeles Isariuz Sandra Los Angeles Sequeira Marta Aguilar v. Janet Reno, Attorney General Executive Office for Immigration Review Michael Creppy, Chief Immigration Judge Paul Schmidt, Chairman of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Alonso Antonio Barahona-Gomez Carmen Victoria Vazquez De Barahona Alonso Antonio Barahona-Vasquez Brenda Verzosa Dino Verzosa Humberto Javier-Rivas Bosco Guillermo Rivas Carole Beltran Santiago Ramon Sequeira Graciela De Los Angeles Isariuz Sandra Los Angeles Sequeira Marta Aguilar v. Janet Reno, Attorney General Executive Office for Immigration Review Michael Creppy, Chief Immigration Judge Paul Schmidt, Chairman of the Board of Immigration Appeals · Barahone-Gomez v. Reno“`procedural' challenge[] to INS practices in the processing of applications,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.