green
Positive treatment
13.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1965 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1965
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 38 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Naqibullah Nadeem Mohammadullah Khan v. United States of America
Meredith v. United States, 330 F.2d 9, 10 (9th Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 18 867 (1964). 19 Plaintiff argues 28 U.S.C. § 2680 (k) does not apply because his claim involves domestic 20 conduct and domestic injury.
cited
Cited "see"
Nikolay Kolov v. Merrick B. Garland
See Cheng Fan Kwok v. INS, 392 U.S. 206, 211 (1968) (discussing Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 (1968) (per curiam)); see also INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 928 , 937–39 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rangolan v. Mukasey
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
Boakai v. Gonzales
(2×)
See Baez v. INS, 41 F.3d 19, 21 (1st Cir.1994) (noting that the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen a deportation proceeding is a judicially reviewable final order) (citing Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18, 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam)); see also Jupiter v. Ashcroft, 396 F.3d 487, 488, 490-91 (1st Cir.2005) (referring to the BIA's denial of a motion to reopen as a "final order” and treating it as such for purposes of jurisdictional limitations imposed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 ). 6 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Torabi v. Gonzales
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (holding that the denial of a motion to reopen is construed as a final order of removal for purposes of an appellate court’s jurisdiction).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sarmadi v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
King Sang Chow v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
Johnson v. INS, 962 F.2d 574, 576 (7th Cir. 1992); Oviawe v. INS, 853 F.2d 1428, 1430 (7th Cir.1988); see Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964).
cited
Cited "see"
Mohammed Aghyad Ajlani v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
See Yousif v. INS, 794 F.2d 236, 240 (6th Cir.1986) (citing Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 (1964) (per curiam); Cheng Fan Kwok v. INS, 392 U.S. 206, 211 (1968) (explaining Giova )).
discussed
Cited "see"
Abel Osarentine Oviawe v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
Variamparambil v. INS, 831 F.2d 1362, 1364-65 (7th Cir.1987); Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156, 1159 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 462 U.S. 1132 , 103 S.Ct. 3112 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1367 (1983); Villena v. INS, 622 F.2d 1352, 1358-59 (9th Cir.1980) (en banc); see Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see"
George Job Variamparambil, A/K/A V.J. George v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (per curiam), reversing 308 F.2d 347 (9th Cir.1962) (per curiam) which held to the contrary.
discussed
Cited "see"
Toma v. Turnage
(2×)
See Williams v. I.N.S., 795 F.2d 738, 742-45 (9th Cir.1986) (Williams ), citing Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see"
Toma v. Turnage
(2×)
See Williams v. I.N.S., 795 F.2d 738, 742-45 (9th Cir.1986) (Williams), citing Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see"
Shamel Yousif v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam); Cheng Fan Kwok v. INS, 392 U.S. 206, 211 , 88 S.Ct. 1970, 1973 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1968) (explaining Giova).
cited
Cited "see"
Reid v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 (1964). .
cited
Cited "see"
Ayrton O. Reid v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Ayrton O. Reid v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, and Executive Office of Immigration Review, Board of Immigration Appeals
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 (1964) 2 The petition we consider here is docketed at 84-3416.
discussed
Cited "see"
Moore v. State, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam), reversing, 308 F.2d 347 (9th Cir.1962) (Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s holding that a refusal to reopen a deportation proceeding was not reviewable under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a which provides for "the judicial review of all final orders of deportation”); see also Paul v. Allender Brown Co., 249 S.W.2d 163 (Ky.App.1952) (adverse ruling on worker’s compensation claimant’s motion to reopen was a final disposition). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Elsa Garcia, A/K/A Elsa Garcia Santos v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964); Foti v. I.
discussed
Cited "see"
Ram Chudshevid, and Dongtip Chudshevid v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
Emiliana Partible v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964); Gena v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 5 Cir., 1970, 424 F.2d 227 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Antonio Reyes and Gregoria C. Reyes v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
Cheng Fan Kwok v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 392 U.S. 206, 216 , 88 S.Ct. 1970 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1968); see Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam) (order denying motion to reopen appealable and within the exclusive jurisdiction of the court of appeals). 1 This analysis of the proper timing of review is compatible with Congress’ intention that section 106(a) correct abuses in the process of judicial review of deportation orders.
discussed
Cited "see"
Au Yi Lau v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964), rev’g 308 F.2d 347 (9th Cir. 1962).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wing Wa Lee v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964), reversing 308 F.2d 347 (9th Cir. 1962).
discussed
Cited "see"
Woodby v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
See the Government's brief in No. 40, Woodby, p. 8, n. 3. [1] Thus the judicial review provision of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U. S. C. § 1009 (e) (5), limits the scope of review to a determination of support by "substantial evidence," and 5 U. S. C. § 1006 limits the agencies to acting on "reliable, probative, and substantial evidence." This pattern has traditionally been held satisfied when the agency decides on the preponderance of the evidence. [2] In Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U. S. 18 , this Court held only that denial of a petition to reopen or reconsider is reviewable.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Pena-Lopez v. Garland
He contends that he affirmatively demonstrated both extraordinary circumstances and extreme hardship to his children, and he maintains that the BIA’s decision to the contrary was “utterly without foundation in the evidence.” The government argues that this court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision because it was a discretionary denial of relief. 9 It points to two unpublished decisions of this court holding that the BIA’s decision whether to waive the one-year limitation under § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(iv)(III) is a discretionary decision that we have no jurisdiction to review un…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Amir Shabo v. Jefferson B. Sessions, III
(2×)
See also Giova v. Rosenberg , 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (reversing the Ninth Circuit's decision that it lacked jurisdiction to review a denial of a *241 motion to reopen and remanding with instructions to review the petition); Jahjaga v. Attorney Gen. of U.S. , 512 F.3d 80 , 82 (3d Cir. 2008) ("The denial of a motion to reopen is itself a final order of removal."); Mayard v. INS , 129 F.3d 438 , 439 (8th Cir. 1997) (explaining that the denial of a motion to reopen qualifies as a "final order of exclusion or deportation").
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Daniel Magana-Pizano v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
Compare Foti v. INS, 375 U.S. 217, 221 , 84 S.Ct. 306 , 11 L.Ed.2d 281 (1963) (Court of Appeals review of discretionary relief) and Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (Court of Appeals review of motion to reopen), with Cheng Fan Kwok v. INS, 392 U.S. 206, 216 , 88 S.Ct. 1970 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1968) (district court review of denial of stay of deportation).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Magana-Pizano v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
(2×)
Compare Foti v. INS, 375 U.S. 217, 221 , 84 S.Ct. 306 , 11 L.Ed.2d 281 (1963) (Court of Appeals review of discretionary relief) and Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (Court of Appeals review of motion to reopen), with Cheng Fan Kwok v. INS, 392 U.S. 206, 216 , 88 S.Ct. 1970 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1968) (district court review of denial of stay of deportation).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6857, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8405, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9481 Daniel Magana-Pizano v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
Compare Foti v. INS, 375 U.S. 217, 221 , 84 S.Ct. 306 , 11 L.Ed.2d 281 (1963) (Court of Appeals review of discretionary relief) and Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (Court of Appeals review of motion to reopen), with Cheng Fan Kwok v. INS, 392 U.S. 206, 216 , 88 S.Ct. 1970 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1968) (district court review of denial of stay of deportation).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Baez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
(2×)
See 8 U.S.C.A. § 1105a (West 1970 & Supp.1994) (prescribing the procedure for review of final deportation orders in the courts of appeals); see also Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam) (holding that the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen a deportation proceeding is a judicially reviewable final order).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Baez v. INS
See 8 U.S.C.A. 1105a (West ___ 1970 & Supp. 1994) (prescribing the procedure for review of final deportation orders in the courts of appeals); see also Giova v. ___ ____ _____ Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18, 18 (1964) (per curiam) (holding that the _________ BIA's denial of a motion to reopen a deportation proceeding is a judicially reviewable final order).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Ayuda, Inc. v. Richard Thornburgh
(4×)
Id.; see also Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (denial of motion to reopen deportation proceedings reviewable only under section 106).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.
See, e.g., Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 , 13 L.Ed. 2d 90 , 85 S.Ct. 377 (1964). 12 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gurbisz v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Service
(2×)
See also Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964); Foti v. INS, 375 U.S. 217 , 84 S.Ct. 306 , 11 L.Ed.2d 281 (1963).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rene Carvajal-Munoz v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Foti v. INS, 375 U.S. 217 , 84 S.Ct. 306 , 11 L.Ed.2d 281 (1963); see also Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Afsaneh Sadegh-Nobari, Hossein Ghanavizchian v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
See also Giova v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 *1351 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964); Foti v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 375 U.S. 217 , 84 S.Ct. 306 , 11 L.Ed.2d 281 (1964).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Mark David Johns, Cross v. Department of Justice of the United States, Angela MacIas Intervenor-Appellee, Cross
(4×)
See also Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964) (per curiam). 32 If, on the other hand, ancillary determinations, such as granting a stay of deportation, 16 are made outside the context of a proceeding under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b), jurisdiction to review initially is not given to the courts of appeals.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Atinuael Colato v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
Compare Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1965) (denial of a motion to reopen deportation proceedings already terminated); Foti v. I.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Attorney General of the United States v. Russell Bufalino
(2×)
See also Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U.S. 18 , 85 S.Ct. 156 , 13 L.Ed.2d 90 (1964).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Giova
v.
Rosenberg, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service
v.
Rosenberg, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service
23.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 26, 1964.
Fred Okrand for petitioner., Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller and Philip R. Monahan for respondent.
Per Curiam.
Cited by 151 opinions | Published
Per Curiam.
Upon consideration of the submission of the United Stated that the judgment of the Court of Appeals should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to entertain the petition for review, and upon examination of the entire record, the judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals with directions to entertain the petition for review.