Pinto v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
648 F.3d 976 · 2011
Citation profile
9 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1105A (§ 106 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. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229A (§ 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229C (§ 240b 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 Miller v. Gammie · Dada v. Mukasey · Lolong v. Gonzales · Galbraith v. County of Santa Clara · Sandie v. Attorney General of United States
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n [declining jurisdiction], the [Hakim ] court ignored the 30-day deadline for petitioning for review of final orders, which in our circuit can begin well before the grant of voluntary departure. The First Circuit did not explain how it could assert jurisdiction over Hakim's petition for review on the merits if he was denied voluntary departure (or decided not to accept voluntary departure if it were granted) and sought to renew juridical review.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Qingyun Li v. Holder“[t]he regulation plainly does not require immigrants to forgo a petition for review before they have been granted voluntary departure, so we decline to follow the First Circuit and effectively force immigrants to choose between judicial review and the hope of voluntary departure. Dada similarly refused to make immigrants choose between accepting voluntary departure and the possibility of a motion to reopen.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Qingyun Li v. Holder“[A] BIA decision denying relief from deportation but remanding the case for voluntary departure proceedings [is] a final order of deportation.”); Hakim v. Holder, 611 F.3d 73 , 79 (1st Cir.2010) (declining to exercise jurisdiction over a petition for review for”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hounmenou v. Holder
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.