Poole v. Mukasey’s Empirical Analysis
522 F.3d 259 · 2008
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably De La Rosa v. Holder (2010), Duarte-Ceri v. Holder (2010)
6 federal appellate · 2 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from New York Eastern District Court)
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (§ 241 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)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1432 (§ 321 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Trop v. Dulles · Ng Fung Ho v. White · Lin Zhong v. United States Department of Justice · Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Miranda · Vance v. Terrazas
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the naturalization of both parents; or (2) the naturalization of the surviving parent if one of the parents is deceased; or (3) the naturalization of the parent having legal custody of the child when there has been a legal separation of the parents or the naturalization of the mother if the child was born out of wedlock and the paternity of the child has not been established by legitimation; and if (4) such naturalization takes place while such child is unmarried and under the age of 18 years; and (5) such child is residing in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence at the time of the naturalization of the parent last naturalized under clause 8 U.S.C. § 1432 (1), or the parent naturalized under clause (2) or (3), or thereafter begins to reside permanently in the United States while under the age of 18 years.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“that a late appeal to the BIA leaves a petitioner's claim unexhausted, and that a court then lacks jurisdiction to consider the unexhausted claims”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. James v. Garland“The statutory administrative exhaustion requirement of § 1252(d)(1) does not apply to a person with a non-frivolous claim to U.S. citizenship.”
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.