Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 727 F.3d 735 - Boika v. Holder

Boika v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

727 F.3d 735 · 2013

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
June 2022
most recently cited

6 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 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. § 1231 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation Same · Paul v. Gonzales · 24 I. & N. Dec. 247 - S-Y-G · Samer Mansour v. Immigration and Naturalization Service · Jukic v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

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

  1. “(1) it is not supported by previously unavailable and material evidence; (2) it fails to establish the applicant's prima facie eligibility for the underlying relief sought; or (3) the Board determines discretionary relief is not appropriate in the petitioner's case.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “sufficient evidence to demonstrate ... a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits so as to make it worthwhile to develop the issues further at a full evidentiary hearing.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “To constitute a change in country conditions, the conditions must have done more than simply worsen cumulatively. That does not mean that the conditions before and after the motion to reopen will not be related or connected. Evaluating gradations of human misery can be a daunting task. Where significant human rights abuses previously existed, perhaps all changes could be understood as a cumulative worsening, but differences in degree matter. Some situations present conditions so grave that a new threshold has been met.”
    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.