Francisco Javier Lepez-Gomez, A.K.A. Miguel Gomez Lopez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 108 F.3d 338 (9th Cir. 1997). · Go Syfert
Search
Francisco Javier Lepez-Gomez, A.K.A. Miguel Gomez Lopez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 108 F.3d 338 (9th Cir. 1997). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
44 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 9 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Arnold v. Loancare, LLC (caed, 2021-02-01)
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Arnold v. Loancare, LLC
E.D. Cal. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kalinauskas v. Yin Wong, 108 F.3d 338 , 1997 WL 67691 at *1 & n.1 (9th Cir. 1997) (table, unpublished) (finding 27 | magistrate judge’s order denying motion to disqualify counsel was not an abuse of discretion); Quatama Park Townhomes Owners Ass'n v. RBC Real Estate Fin., Inc., 365 F. Supp. 3d 1129, 1133 (D.
discussed Cited "see" Adidas America, Inc. v. Cougar Sport, Inc.
D. Or. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See MCA Records, Inc. v. Charly Records Ltd., 108 F.3d 338 , 1997 WL 76173 , at *5 (9th Cir.1997) (unpublished) (finding that the plaintiffs claims arose out of the defendant’s forum-related activities in a trademark infringement action where some of the defendant’s advertisement and sales activity was directed toward the forum state). 3.
cited Cited "see" Jones v. Johnson
5th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Jones v. Peterson, 108 F.3d 338 (9th Cir.) (table), 1997 U.S.App.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Cascadia Wildlands v. United States Bureau of Land Management
9th Cir. · 2025 · signal: see also · confidence low
Finally, the agency took this position in its interpretive memoranda that it exchanged with FWS, Ratanasen v. Cal. Dep’t of Health Servs., 11 F.3d 1467, 1469 (9th Cir. 1993); cf. Singh v. Holder, 591 F.3d 1190, 1199 (9th Cir. 2010) (noting that any legal error by an immigration judge was rendered harmless by de novo review by the board of immigration appeals); see also Maydak v. SeaFirst, No. 96-35660, 108 F.3d 338 , 1997 WL 75685 , at *2 n.2 (9th Cir. Feb. 20, 1997) (unpublished).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Francisco Javier Lepez-Gomez, A.K.A. Miguel Gomez Lopez
v.
Immigration and Naturalization Service
96-70412.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Feb 20, 1997.
108 F.3d 338
Unpublished

108 F.3d 338

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Francisco Javier LEPEZ-GOMEZ, a.k.a. Miguel Gomez Lopez, Petitioner,
v.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 96-70412.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 18, 1997.[*]
Decided Feb. 20, 1997.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, No. Ats-jfp-len.

BIA

PETITION DISMISSED.

Before: ALARCN, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

1

MEMORANDUM[**]

2

Francisco Javier Lepez-Gomez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision finding him deportable as charged for having been convicted of an aggravated felony and a controlled substance violation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2)(A), and affirming an immigration judge's denial of his request for relief from deportation pursuant to section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c).

3

In accord with our opinion in Duldulao v. INS, 90 F.3d 396, 399-400 (9th Cir.1996), we dismiss Lepez-Gomez's petition for lack of jurisdiction.

4

DISMISSED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. Accordingly, Lepez-Gomez's request for oral argument is denied

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3