Bian v. Clinton’s Empirical Analysis
605 F.3d 249 · 2010
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 5 U.S.C. § 701 · 5 U.S.C. § 702 · 6 U.S.C. § 271 · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1255 (§ 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1571
Relies on Norton Secretary of the Interior et al. v. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance et al. · Giddings v. Chandler · Home Builders Ass'n of Mississippi, Inc. v. City of Madison · 466 F. Supp. 2d 696 - Safadi v. Howard · 340 F. Supp. 2d 384 - Kim 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he district court lacked jurisdiction to consider [plaintiffs] claim, as Congress has expressly precluded judicial review of the USCIS’s pace of adjudication when the agency acts within its discretion and pursuant to the regulations that the agency deems necessary for carrying out its statutory grant of authority.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(b) Policy (.It is the sense 'of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days after the initial filing of the application....”
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.