Cases

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 10-1-00872-3, Ronald E. Culpepper, J., entered September 2, 2011. Affirmed by unpublished opinion per Johanson, A.C.J., concurred in by Penoyar and Bjorgen, JJ.

FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 5, 2021 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR

BERZON, Circuit Judge. This case presents for review a literally incomprehensible opinion by an immigration judge (IJ), denying petitioner’s applications for asylum and withholding of removal. 1 The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), pursuant to the “streamlining” regulation, 8 C.F.R. •§ 1003.1(e)(4) (2004),

MEMORANDUM ** In these consolidated appeals, Randolfo Cabrera Recinos and Gloria Isabel Fajardo, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order reversing the immigration judge’s decision granting cancellation of removal, as well as the BIA’s denial of their motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.

ORDER AND REASONS AFRICK, District Judge. Before the Court are two motions filed on behalf of plaintiffs, Hugo Martin Recinos-Recinos, Pablo Recinos-Alvarado, and Alberto Alvarado: 1) a motion for certification of a class action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,1 and 2) a motion for conditional certification of a collective action.

MEMORANDUM** *474Victor Manuel Quinonez Recinos (“Recinos”), his spouse Maria and their three children, all natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming, without opinion, an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have juris

MEMORANDUM ** Maura Ester Martinez-Recinos, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum and withholding of removal. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for substantial evidence, Berroteran-Melendez v. INS, 955 F.2d 1251

MEMORANDUM** Esvin Benito Castillo-Recinos, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming without opinion the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order of removal and denial of asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1). We deny in part, and dismiss in part, the petition for review.

566 F.3d 965 (2009) Adin Abieser Peraza RECINOS, Petitioner, v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. No. 08-15782 Non-Argument Calendar. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. April 27, 2009. Adin Abieser Peraza-Recinos, Miami, FL, pro se. Jennifer Paisner Williams, Jesse M. Bless, David V. Bernal, U.S. Dept. of Justice, OIL, Washington, DC, for U.S.

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ERNESTO ADOLFO RECINOS DE LEON,  Petitioner, No. 02-73352 v.  Agency No. A72-527-227 ALBERTO GONZALES,* Attorney General, OPINION Respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT HARDIMAN, Circuit Judge. Edin Recinos Orellana (Recinos) petitions for review of two orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), dismissing his appeal to reopen and rescind an in absentia removal order and denying his motion to reopen and reconsider its dismissal. For the following reasons, we will deny both petitions. I Because w

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE STATE OF DELAWARE, ) ) ) v. ) ID. No. 1705014681 ) ) ELDER SAAVEDRA, ) ) Defendant. ) Submitted: May 2, 2025

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 24-1444 _____________ HECTOR DAVID TIPAN LOPEZ, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency N

ORDER SAM SPARKS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE' BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Defendants Department of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, Leon Rodriguez, and Mario Ortiz’s Motion to Dismiss [#22], Plaintiffs Deepak Bu-dhathoki, Clesmy E. Canales Gonzales, and Katharine Yurlieth Turcios-Perez’s Response [# 27] in opposition, Defendants’ Re

BENTON, Circuit Judge. Olivia Nabulwala challenges the final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying her claim for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. Having jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D), this court grants the petition and remands. I. Nabulwala, a Uga

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING MOTION FOR SANCTIONS PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, District Judge. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions came on for hearing before the court on February 15, 2012. Plaintiffs Alfred Lam, Frank Chen, Gregory Chin, and Paula Leiato appeared through their counsel, Dow Patten and Spencer Smith. Defendant City and County of Sa

OPINION GILMAN, Circuit Judge. Vitore Rreshpja is a citizen of Albania who was born in 1982. She arrived in the United States in November of 2001 with a fraudulently obtained nonimmigrant visa after an unknown man attempted to abduct her in her home country. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) initiated removal proceedings against her severa

1 F.3d 662 38 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1496 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Candido ORTIZ-MARTINEZ, Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Gabriel Jaime RAMIREZ-NAZAR, Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Carlos FUENTEZ, also known as Carlos Fuentes, also known asPupo, also known as Pupoo, Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Stanley PRUITT, App

Judgment PER CURIAM. This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

SUSAN P. WATTERS, United States District Judge Plaintiff Miguel Angel Reynaga Hernandez seeks compensatory and punitive damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 from Defendants Derrek Skinner and Pedro Hernandez. Miguel also seeks a declaratory judgment that the Defendants' actions were illegal. Before the Court are cross-mo