Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 567 F.3d 387 - Vargas v. Holder

Vargas v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

567 F.3d 387 · 2009

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
May 2025
most recently cited

7 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2025

7 federal appellate ·

110200920102020decided

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. § 1229B (§ 240a 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 Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu · Fernandez v. Gonzales · COELHO · MONREAL · Infanzon v. Ashcroft

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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “reopening should not be granted unless the alien ha[s] met 'the heavy burden' of showing that the new evidence presented ' would likely change the result in the case .'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The BIA abuses its discretion if its decision is without rational explanation, departs from established policies, invidiously discriminates against a particular race or group, or where the agency fails to consider all factors presented by the alien or distorts important aspects of the claim.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[W]e have jurisdiction over motions to reopen regarding cases in which ... the evidence submitted addresses a hardship ground so distinct from that considered previously as to make the motion to reopen a request for new relief, rather than for reconsideration of a prior denial.”
    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.