Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 568 F.3d 708 - Pangilinan v. Holder

Pangilinan v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

568 F.3d 708 · 2009

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
May 2022
most recently cited

2 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently May 2022

2 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. § 1229A (§ 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales · Agyeman v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Norma Antonia Jacinto and Ronald Garcia v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Opinion · Colmenar v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Salgado-Diaz 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “appearing pro se often lack the legal knowledge to navigate their way successfully through the morass of immigration law, and because their failure to do so successfully might result in their expulsion from this country.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “An IJ cannot correct his failure to probe more deeply by simply asking the alien whether he has anything to add in support of his claim.”
    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.