8 U.S.C. § 1105a
Employment authorization for battered spouses of certain nonimmigrants
In the case of an alien spouse admitted under subparagraph (A), (E)(iii), (G), or (H) of section 1101(a)(15) of this title who is accompanying or following to join a principal alien admitted under subparagraph (A), (E)(iii), (G), or (H) of such section, respectively, the Secretary of Homeland Security may authorize the alien spouse to engage in employment in the United States and provide the spouse with an “employment authorized” endorsement or other appropriate work permit if the alien spouse demonstrates that during the marriage the alien spouse or a child of the alien spouse has been battered or has been the subject of extreme cruelty perpetrated by the spouse of the alien spouse. Requests for relief under this section shall be handled under the procedures that apply to aliens seeking relief under section 1154(a)(1)(A)(iii) of this title.
The grant of employment authorization pursuant to this section shall not confer upon the alien any other form of relief.
A prior section 1105a, act June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title I, § 106, as added
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3,023
cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1961–2026 · leading case: Stone v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386 (1995).
Stone v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386 (1995). “" 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a) (1988 ed. and Supp.”
Reno v. Am.-Arab Anti-Discrimination Comm., 525 U.S. 471 (1999). “The opinion rejected the Attorney General's argument that selective-enforcement claims are inappropriate in the immigration context, and her alternative argument that the special statutory-review provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U. S. C. § 1105a,…”
Lin Zhong v. United States Dep't of Just., Attorney Gen. Gonzales, 480 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 2007). “3009 , 3009-546, 3009-625, which preserved jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a) (repealed 1996), in cases such as this in which deportation proceedings were initiated prior to April 1, 1997, and in which the BIA issued its final order of deportation after October 30, 1996.”
William v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 329 (4th Cir. 2007). “§ 1105a(c), which barred judicial review of deportation orders after an alien departed or was removed from the country.”
Agosto v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 436 U.S. 748 (1978). “The question for decision is whether petitioner has made a sufficient showing in support of his claim to United States citizenship to entitle him to a de novo judicial determination *750 of that claim under § 106 (a) (5) (B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U. S. C. §…”
Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009). “3009 -612 (repealing 8 U. S. C. § 1105a (1994 ed.)). If such an alien seeks to remain in the United States pending judicial review, IIRIRA provides that the alien must make the heightened showing required under § 1252(f)(2).”
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). “651 (formerly codified at 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a)) (repealed 1996). The 1961 Act specified that federal habeas courts were also available to hear statutory and constitutional challenges to deportation (and exclusion) orders.”
United States v. Mendoza-Lopez, 481 U.S. 828 (1987). “8 U. S. C. § 1105a provides that, outside of enumerated exceptions, the procedures prescribed by Title 28 of the United States Code for review of federal agency orders "shall be the sole and exclusive procedure for, the judicial review of all final orders of deportation.”
Oscar Socop-Gonzalez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 272 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2001). “IIRIRA replaced the old statutory section governing judicial review of deportation and exclusion orders, INA § 106, 8 U.S.C. § 1105a, with a new section governing judicial review of "removal” orders, INA § 242, 8 U.”
Lin Zhong v. United States Dep't of Just., Attorney Gen. Gonzales, 461 F.3d 101 (2d Cir. 2006). “Our jurisdiction to hear Lin’s petition for review arises under the transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) § 309(c)(1), Pub.”
Carlos Amilcar Umanzor Umanzor v. David H. Lambert, Dist. Dir., U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 782 F.2d 1299 (5th Cir. 1986). “8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(2). . 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(3).”
Moises Garcia-Mir v. William French Smith, 766 F.2d 1478 (11th Cir. 1985). “The plaintiffs initiated it on August 7, 1981, when they amended their complaint to request review under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(b), and nullification of their exclusion orders on the ground that they were “refugees” under 8 U.”
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(1)(10) — 1 case
Ramadan v. Gonzales (9th Cir. 2007).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(10) — 5 cases
United States v. Rivera-Nevarez, 418 F.3d 1104 (10th Cir. 2005).
Andres Flores-Miramontes,petitioner v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 212 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2000).
Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (2001).
Homayun v. Cravener, 39 F. Supp. 2d 837 (S.D. Tex. 1999).
Hall v. INS (4th Cir. 1999).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(10)(1997) — 1 case
Norman Anthony Hall v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 167 F.3d 852 (4th Cir. 1999).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(10)(b) — 1 case
Mohammad v. Slattery, 842 F. Supp. 1553 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(2) — 1 case
Ijoma v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 854 F. Supp. 612 (D. Neb. 1993).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(3)(a) — 1 case
Teshome-Gebreegziabher v. Mukasey, 528 F.3d 330 (4th Cir. 2008).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(4) — 8 cases
Daniel Francei Gumbol v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 815 F.2d 406 (6th Cir. 1987).
Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Civiletti, 503 F. Supp. 442 (S.D. Fla. 1980).
Dong Hyung Lee v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 550 F.2d 554 (9th Cir. 1977).
Syrous Tashnizi v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 585 F.2d 781 (5th Cir. 1978).
Jose Ruben Leon-Hernandez v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 926 F.2d 902 (9th Cir. 1991).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(5) — 2 cases
Veloquio-De La Cruz v. Ashcroft, 85 F. App'x 385 (5th Cir. 2004).
Veloquio-De La Cruz v. Ashcroft (5th Cir. 2004).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(6) — 5 cases
United States v. Lino Lorenzo De La Cruz-Sepulveda, 656 F.2d 1129 (5th Cir. 1981).
Abraham F. Zimmerman v. John M. Lehmann, Dist. Dir., Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 339 F.2d 943 (7th Cir. 1965).
Guillermo Ciro Arones v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 138 F. App'x 252 (11th Cir. 2005).
Magda Catalina Merino Barreto v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 164 F. App'x 890 (11th Cir. 2006).
Mesbah Uddin v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 223 F. App'x 832 (11th Cir. 2007).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(9) — 4 cases
Chavan v. Drysdale, 513 F. Supp. 990 (N.D.N.Y. 1981).
Sanchez v. Kindt, 752 F. Supp. 1419 (S.D. Ind. 1990).
Farzad v. Chandler, 670 F. Supp. 690 (N.D. Tex. 1987).
Billett v. Reno, 2 F. Supp. 2d 368 (W.D.N.Y. 1998).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(A)(10) — 1 case
Garza-Rodriguez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 2 F. App'x 825 (9th Cir. 2001).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(A)(4) — 1 case
Montano v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 34 F. App'x 603 (9th Cir. 2002).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(C) — 1 case
Cabrera v. Reno, 5 F. Supp. 2d 244 (D.N.J. 1998).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a) — 1291 cases
Stone v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386 (1995). “" 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a) (1988 ed. and Supp.”
Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983).
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). “651 (formerly codified at 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a)) (repealed 1996). The 1961 Act specified that federal habeas courts were also available to hear statutory and constitutional challenges to deportation (and exclusion) orders.”
Besime Kanacevic v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 448 F.3d 129 (2d Cir. 2006).
United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(1) — 43 cases
Stone v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386 (1995). “" 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a) (1988 ed. and Supp.”
Henderson v. Shinseki, 589 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Zakia Mashiri v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen., 383 F.3d 1112 (9th Cir. 2004).
Gary Laguerre v. Janet Reno, Jose, Martin Avelar-Cruz v. Janet Reno, 164 F.3d 1035 (7th Cir. 1999).
Larry Efosa Bazuaye, Petitioner, v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., Respondent, 79 F.3d 118 (9th Cir. 1996).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(10) — 175 cases
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). “651 (formerly codified at 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a)) (repealed 1996). The 1961 Act specified that federal habeas courts were also available to hear statutory and constitutional challenges to deportation (and exclusion) orders.”
Mojica v. Reno, 970 F. Supp. 130 (E.D.N.Y 1997).
Abdul Hakeem v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 273 F.3d 812 (9th Cir. 2001).
Richardson v. Reno, 162 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 1998).
Pedro Alejandro Salazar-Haro v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 95 F.3d 309 (3rd Cir. 1996).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(10)(1970) — 1 case
Medina v. United States, 92 F. Supp. 2d 545 (E.D. Va. 2000).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(1994) — 2 cases
Escobar-Ortiz v. INS (5th Cir. 2001).
Herrera-Marroquin v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 12 F. App'x 458 (9th Cir. 2001).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(2) — 51 cases
Fidel Bibiano v. Loretta E. Lynch, 834 F.3d 966 (9th Cir. 2016).
Marcus Andre Michael v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 48 F.3d 657 (2d Cir. 1995).
Margaret J. Randall v. Edwin Meese, Iii, Attorney Gen., 854 F.2d 472 (D.C. Cir. 1988).
Brijmati Singh, Petitioner, v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., Respondent, 134 F.3d 962 (9th Cir. 1998).
Manraj Singh Sidhu v. Immigr. & Naturalizationservice, 220 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2000).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(3) — 112 cases
Stone v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386 (1995). “" 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a) (1988 ed. and Supp.”
Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009). “3009 -612 (repealing 8 U. S. C. § 1105a (1994 ed.)). If such an alien seeks to remain in the United States pending judicial review, IIRIRA provides that the alien must make the heightened showing required under § 1252(f)(2).”
Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271 (9th Cir. 2007).
Marcus Andre Michael v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 48 F.3d 657 (2d Cir. 1995).
William v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 329 (4th Cir. 2007). “§ 1105a(c), which barred judicial review of deportation orders after an alien departed or was removed from the country.”
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4) — 523 cases
Xiao Ji Chen v. United States Dep't of Just., Attorney Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales, 471 F.3d 315 (2d Cir. 2006).
Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (1992).
Guang Run Yu v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen. of the United States, 364 F.3d 700 (6th Cir. 2004).
Saidou Dia v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen. of the United States, 353 F.3d 228 (3rd Cir. 2003).
Jacob Eta-Ndu Catherine Eta-Ndu Danielle Eta-Ndu & Gwladys Eta-Ndu v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney Gen. of the United States of Am., 411 F.3d 977 (8th Cir. 2005).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4)(1988) — 1 case
Civil v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 140 F.3d 52 (1st Cir. 1998).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4)(1994) — 2 cases
Tegegn v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 57 F. App'x 172 (4th Cir. 2003).
Chang Ding Zou v. United States Attorney Gen., 94 F. App'x 861 (2d Cir. 2004).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4)(1996) — 1 case
David Daada Gonahasa v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 181 F.3d 538 (4th Cir. 1999).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(5) — 26 cases
Mondaca-Vega v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 2013).
Thadeus Drozd, A/K/A Adam Passoni v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 155 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 1998).
Olga Nubia Ceja De Brown v. Dep't of Just. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. Bd. of Immigr. Appeal, 18 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 1994).
Mondaca-Vega v. Holder, 808 F.3d 413 (9th Cir. 2015).
Francisco Sanchez-Martinez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 714 F.2d 72 (9th Cir. 1983).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(5)(B) — 6 cases
Cesar Batista v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen. of the United States, 270 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2001).
Raymond Coriolan & Willy Bonannee v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 559 F.2d 993 (5th Cir. 1977).
Travis Murphy v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 54 F.3d 605 (9th Cir. 1995).
Jesus Sanchez-Sanchez v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 957 F.2d 702 (9th Cir. 1992).
Jeff Soun Howard A/K/A Mohamed Kandiel v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 930 F.2d 432 (5th Cir. 1991).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(6) — 34 cases
Stone v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386 (1995). “" 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a) (1988 ed. and Supp.”
United States v. Mendoza-Lopez, 481 U.S. 828 (1987). “8 U. S. C. § 1105a provides that, outside of enumerated exceptions, the procedures prescribed by Title 28 of the United States Code for review of federal agency orders "shall be the sole and exclusive procedure for, the judicial review of all final orders of deportation.”
Kucana v. Holder, 558 U.S. 233 (2010).
Dela Cruz v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2008).
Dave Fleary v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 950 F.2d 711 (11th Cir. 1992).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(7) — 7 cases
Saint Fort v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 191 (1st Cir. 2003).
Ngwando Zele Nyonzele v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 83 F.3d 975 (8th Cir. 1996).
Salvador Humberto Zepeda-Melendez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 741 F.2d 285 (9th Cir. 1984).
Carlos Amilcar Umanzor Umanzor v. David H. Lambert, Dist. Dir., U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 782 F.2d 1299 (5th Cir. 1986). “8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(2). . 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(3).”
Khaldoon Nasan Saadi v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 912 F.2d 428 (10th Cir. 1990).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(8) — 6 cases
Stone v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386 (1995). “" 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a) (1988 ed. and Supp.”
Pasqual Antonio-Martinez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 317 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2003).
Hincapie-Nieto v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 92 F.3d 27 (2d Cir. 1996).
Massieu v. Reno, 915 F. Supp. 681 (D.N.J. 1996).
Slawomir Zegarski v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 965 F.2d 426 (7th Cir. 1992).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(9) — 63 cases
United States v. Mendoza-Lopez, 481 U.S. 828 (1987). “8 U. S. C. § 1105a provides that, outside of enumerated exceptions, the procedures prescribed by Title 28 of the United States Code for review of federal agency orders "shall be the sole and exclusive procedure for, the judicial review of all final orders of deportation.”
Carlos Amilcar Umanzor Umanzor v. David H. Lambert, Dist. Dir., U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 782 F.2d 1299 (5th Cir. 1986). “8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(2). . 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(3).”
Russel K. Williams, Et Ux. v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 795 F.2d 738 (9th Cir. 1986).
Gary Laguerre v. Janet Reno, Jose, Martin Avelar-Cruz v. Janet Reno, 164 F.3d 1035 (7th Cir. 1999).
Pedro Rodriguez-Fernandez v. George C. Wilkinson, Warden, 654 F.2d 1382 (10th Cir. 1981).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(I) — 1 case
Guadencia Aguilar & Neria Irene Magana De Iglesias v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 638 F.2d 717 (5th Cir. 1981).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(c) — 1 case
Carlos Amilcar Umanzor Umanzor v. David H. Lambert, Dist. Dir., U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 782 F.2d 1299 (5th Cir. 1986). “8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(2). . 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(3).”
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(l) — 119 cases
Samuel Martinez-Serrano v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 94 F.3d 1256 (9th Cir. 1996).
Edgardo Nocon & Charito Nocon v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 789 F.2d 1028 (3rd Cir. 1986).
Stone v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386 (1995). “" 8 U. S. C. § 1105a(a) (1988 ed. and Supp.”
Erskine Alleyne v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 879 F.2d 1177 (3rd Cir. 1989).
Harold E. Bailey, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 160 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(l)(l993) — 1 case
United States v. El Shami, 434 F.3d 659 (4th Cir. 2005).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(b) — 113 cases
Moises Garcia-Mir v. William French Smith, 766 F.2d 1478 (11th Cir. 1985). “The plaintiffs initiated it on August 7, 1981, when they amended their complaint to request review under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(b), and nullification of their exclusion orders on the ground that they were “refugees” under 8 U.”
Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21 (1982).
Rafeal Ramirez-Durazo, Rosa Isela Lopez De Ramirez, Luz Maria Ramirez-Alcaraz, Maria Sara Ramirez-Alcaraz v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 794 F.2d 491 (9th Cir. 1986).
Fernandez-Roque v. Smith, 539 F. Supp. 925 (N.D. Ga. 1982).
Hose v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 180 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 1999).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(b)(1984) — 2 cases
Tefel v. Reno, 180 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 1999).
Tefel v. Reno (11th Cir. 1999).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c) — 374 cases
Lin Zhong v. United States Dep't of Just., Attorney Gen. Gonzales, 480 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 2007). “3009 , 3009-546, 3009-625, which preserved jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a) (repealed 1996), in cases such as this in which deportation proceedings were initiated prior to April 1, 1997, and in which the BIA issued its final order of deportation after October 30, 1996.”
William v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 329 (4th Cir. 2007). “§ 1105a(c), which barred judicial review of deportation orders after an alien departed or was removed from the country.”
Lin Zhong v. United States Dep't of Just., Attorney Gen. Gonzales, 461 F.3d 101 (2d Cir. 2006). “Our jurisdiction to hear Lin’s petition for review arises under the transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) § 309(c)(1), Pub.”
Oscar Socop-Gonzalez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 272 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2001). “IIRIRA replaced the old statutory section governing judicial review of deportation and exclusion orders, INA § 106, 8 U.S.C. § 1105a, with a new section governing judicial review of "removal” orders, INA § 242, 8 U.”
Santos-Zacaria v. Garland, 598 U.S. 411 (2023).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c)(1962) — 2 cases
Rosillo-Puga v. Holder, 580 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir. 2009).
Luna v. Holder, 637 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2011).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c)(1993) — 1 case
United States v. Segundo Dejesus Perez, 330 F.3d 97 (2d Cir. 2003).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c)(1994) — 8 cases
Tapia Garcia v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 237 F.3d 1216 (10th Cir. 2001).
Tomas Alejandro Mendez-Alcaraz v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney Gen., 464 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2006).
Omogiate v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 61 F. App'x 258 (7th Cir. 2003).
Crosby-Vargas v. Ashcroft, 83 F. App'x 580 (5th Cir. 2003).
Montefusco v. Casterline, 87 F. App'x 375 (5th Cir. 2004).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c)(1995) — 1 case
Beltran v. Ashcroft, 78 F. App'x 578 (9th Cir. 2003).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c)(8) — 1 case
Fuller v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 144 F. Supp. 2d 72 (D. Conn. 2000).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(d) — 4 cases
Tahir Useinovic v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 313 F.3d 1025 (7th Cir. 2002).
De Hoyos v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 339 (5th Cir. 2008).
Calderon v. Reno, 39 F. Supp. 2d 943 (N.D. Ill. 1998).
Useinovic, Tahir v. INS (7th Cir. 2002).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(e) — 34 cases
Orlando Roldan v. James Racette, Superintendent, Adirondack Corr. Facility, & U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 984 F.2d 85 (2d Cir. 1993).
Panjwani v. Gonzales, 401 F.3d 626 (5th Cir. 2005).
William v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 329 (4th Cir. 2007). “§ 1105a(c), which barred judicial review of deportation orders after an alien departed or was removed from the country.”
Demetrio Reynoso-Lopez v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen. of the United States of Am., 369 F.3d 275 (3rd Cir. 2004).
United States v. Viken Yacoubian, 24 F.3d 1 (9th Cir. 1994).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(f)(6) — 1 case
Govindbhai M. Patel v. INS (8th Cir. 2000).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(l) — 1 case
Francisco Lucas Rodriguez-Roman v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 98 F.3d 416 (9th Cir. 1996).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(l)(10) — 2 cases
Neama El Sayed Ramadan Gaser Hesham El Gendy v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney Gen., 479 F.3d 646 (9th Cir. 2007).
Tam v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 14 F. Supp. 2d 1184 (E.D. Cal. 1998).
— 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(á) — 1 case
Juana (Haro) Amaya v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., Am. Immigr. Lawyers Ass'n, Amicus Curiae, 36 F.3d 992 (10th Cir. 1994).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.