Carlos Humberto Ordonez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service’s Empirical Analysis
345 F.3d 777 · 2003
Citation profile
38 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 268 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Najmabadi v. Holder (2010), Fernandez v. Gonzales (2006)
38 federal appellate ·
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
Relies on Oscar Socop-Gonzalez v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Rodriguez-Lariz v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Aguilera-Cota v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Santiago Pedro-Mateo v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
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 268 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to an alien allowed to depart voluntarily unless, before such departure, the Attorney General has provided written notice to the alien in English and Spanish and oral notice either in the alien's native language or in another language the alien understands of the consequences under subparagraph (A) of the alien's remaining in the United States after the scheduled date of departure, other than because of exceptional circumstances.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“not require[ ] a conclusive showing that eligibility for relief has been established .... [We] reopen[ ] proceedings where new facts alleged, when coupled with the facts already of record, satisfy us that it would be worthwhile to develop the issues at a further plenary hearing on reopening.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] respondent demonstrates prima facie eligibility for relief where the evidence reveals a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied.”
2 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.