Balachandran v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
566 F.3d 269 · 2009
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2024
10 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
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 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 Ravindran v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Wan Chien Kho v. Keisler · Scatambuli v. Holder · Chhay v. Mukasey · Un v. Gonzáles
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.
“[S]uch [corroborating] evidence must be provided unless the applicant does not have the evidence and cannot reasonably obtain the evidence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“show[s] both that he was able to obtain corroborating items ... and that he was aware of the need to provide documentation in support of his application.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Gonzalez v. Whitaker“that there is a pattern or practice . . . of persecution of a group of persons similarly situated to the [noncitizen] on account of”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.