2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 9 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 Pllumi v. Attorney General of the United States.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pllumi v. Attorney General of the United States Anchor | green | “hen presented with a bia decision rejecting a motion for sua sponte reopening, we may exercise jurisdiction to the limited extent of recognizing when the bia has relied on an incorrect legal premise.” | 5 |
| 2 | Mahmood v. Holder | green | “here the agency may have declined to exercise its sua sponte authority because it misperceived the legal background and thought, incorrectly, that a reopening would necessarily fail, remand to the agency for reconsideration in view of the correct law is appropriate.” | 4 |
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.