Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 33 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Mohammad Reza Daneshvar v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mohammad Reza Daneshvar v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States Anchor | green | “if discrepancies 'cannot be viewed as attempts by the applicant to enhance his claims of persecution, they have no bearing on credibility.” | 18 |
| 2 | Mohammad Reza Daneshvar v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States | green | “cannot be based on an irrelevant inconsistency.” | 8 |
| 3 | Elzbieta Klawitter v. Immigration and Naturalization Service | green | “simply because it is convinced that it would have decided the case differently.” | 7 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.