Cases

LESLIE H. SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judge: Khanh Nhat Thuy Le petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals decision that upheld the denial of her application for an adjustment of her status to that of a lawful permanent resident. The petition is DENIED. Le entered the United States at Los Angeles, California in March 1997 using a K-l visa. Such visa

Opinion CANTIL-SAKAUYE, C. J. In People v. Rodriguez (2009) 47 Cal.4th 501 [98 Cal.Rptr.3d 108, 213 P.3d 647] (Rodriguez), we held that a defendant’s single act of personally using a gun during the commission of a felony could not be used to support both a sentence enhancement for personal use of a firearm under Penal Code section 12022.5, former subdivision (a)(1),1

EMAS, C.J. Eric Trelles appeals from the trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of Le Basque on claims of tortious interference with a business relationship and breach of fiduciary duty, and the subsequent entry of final judgment for damages in the amount of $ 251,519.74. We affirm, holding (1) the trial court properly entered summary judgment on the two tort claims, as no genuine issue of material

HORTON, Justice. *463 Kilo J. Le Veque appeals the decisions of the district court in Kootenai County to revoke his probation and subsequently relinquish jurisdiction. Le Veque argues that the district court abused its discretion in these decisions by refusing to consider the propriety of th

EMAS, C.J. Eric Trelles appeals from the trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of Le Basque on claims of tortious interference with a business relationship and breach of fiduciary duty, and the subsequent entry of final judgment for damages in the amount of $ 251,519.74. We affirm, holding (1) the trial court properly entered summary judgment on the two tort claims, as no genuine issue of material

ORDER (Mot Challenge Designation ECF Nos. 281/282) PEGGY A. LEEN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Before the court is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Challenge Work Product Designation (ECF No. 281 filed under seal, and the redacted version (ECF No. 282) filed on the public record. The court has considered the motion, Zuffa’s Opposition (ECF Nos. 294/295), numerous related filings1

ORDER RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I. INTRODUCTION Before the Court are identical Motions to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 64,16, 30,16) in the instant case and member cases 2:15-cv-01046-RFB-PAL, 2:15-cv-01055-RFB-PAL, 2:15-cv-01056-RFB-PAL, and 2:15-cv-01057-RFB-PAL, as well as a Stipulation re: Discovery of Electronically Stored Information (ECF No. 160). For the sake of

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE EDWARD J. DAVILA, United States District Judge Representative Plaintiffs Cung Le, Nathan Quarry, Jon Fitch, Luis Javier Vasquez, Dennis Lloyd Hallman, Brandon Vera, Pablo Garza, Gabe Ruediger, Mac Danzig, Kyle Kingsbury and Darren Uye-noyama (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) are professional athletes. Plaintiffs each compete in a style of fighting known as mix

622 F.3d 87 (2010) LE BIN ZHU, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. No. 10-1042. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Submitted June 30, 2010. Decided October 14, 2010. *89 Michael Brown was on brief for petitioner. Tim Ramnitz, Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigat

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioner Le Ping Huang, a native and citizen of China, seeks review of the August 13, 2008 order of the BIA affirming the February 12, 2007 decision of Immigration Judge (“IJ”) Vivienne E. Gordon-Uruakpa denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Le Ping Huang, No. A 97 660 875 (B.I.A. Aug. 13, 2008), affg No. A 9

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioner Chuan Le Zhou, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, seeks review of the May 22, 2008 order of the BIA denying his motion to reopen. In re Chuan Le Zhou, No. A77 234 202 (B.I.A. May 22, 2008). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discre

SUMMARY ORDER Fu Le Wu, a native and citizen of China, seeks review of the April 9, 2008 order of the BIA denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings. In re Fu Le Wu, No. A98 977 009 (B.I.A. Apr. 9, 2008). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. See Kaur v

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioner Le Ping Huang, a native and citizen of China, seeks review of the August 13, 2008 order of the BIA affirming the February 12, 2007 decision of Immigration Judge (“IJ”) Vivienne E. Gordon-Uruakpa denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Le Ping Huang, No. A 97 660 875 (B.I.A. Aug. 13, 2008), affg No. A 9

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioner Le Shang Pan, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, seeks review of the November 21, 2008 order of the BIA denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. In re Le Shang Pan, No. A094 797 572 (B.I.A. Nov. 21, 2008). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. We ordinarily review the BIA’s denial of

SUMMARY ORDER Fu Le Wu, a native and citizen of China, seeks review of the April 9, 2008 order of the BIA denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings. In re Fu Le Wu, No. A98 977 009 (B.I.A. Apr. 9, 2008). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. See Kaur v

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioner Le Shang Pan, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, seeks review of the November 21, 2008 order of the BIA denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. In re Le Shang Pan, No. A094 797 572 (B.I.A. Nov. 21, 2008). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. We ordinarily review the BIA’s denial of

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioner Chuan Le Zhou, a native and citizen of the People’s Republic of China, seeks review of the May 22, 2008 order of the BIA denying his motion to reopen. In re Chuan Le Zhou, No. A77 234 202 (B.I.A. May 22, 2008). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. We review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discre

MEMORANDUM ** Trung Le appeals the trial court’s decision, after a bench trial, that he failed to carry his burden of proof in his claim under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30104, and in his general maritime law claim in which he alleged that the F/T Northern Jaeger was unseaworthy. Reviewing the trial court’s findings of fact for clear error, Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a)(6), we may disturb the trial court’s factual fi

MEMORANDUM ** Trung Le appeals the trial court’s decision, after a bench trial, that he failed to carry his burden of proof in his claim under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 30104, and in his general maritime law claim in which he alleged that the F/T Northern Jaeger was unseaworthy. Reviewing the trial court’s findings of fact for clear error, Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a)(6), we may disturb the trial court’s factual fi

WILSON, Circuit Judge: We are asked to decide whether the “departure bar” regulation — stating that the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) may not entertain a motion to reopen filed by or on behalf of a person who has departed the United States — impermissibly conflicts with the Immigration and Nationality Act’s provision permitting an alien to file one motion to reopen.