Melhem v. Gonzales’s Empirical Analysis
500 F.3d 78 · 2007
Citation profile
13 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Liteky et al United States · Pan v. Gonzales · Sharari v. Gonzáles · Ouk v. Gonzales · Chahid Hayek v. Gonzales
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e lack jurisdiction over Melhem’s asylum application because the IJ found his application time-barred and the BIA affirmed that determination.”). 4 . As for petitions for withholding of removal, an applicant’s testimony may be sufficient to sustain this burden of proof without corroboration. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16 (b). But, in evaluating the applicant's case, if the IJ determines that the alien’s”
1 later decision 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.