Cases

MEMORANDUM** This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioner’s motion to reopen or reconsider removal proceedings. The regulations provide that “a party may file only one motion to reopen,” see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and that “a party may file only one motion to reconsider any given decision....” See 8 C.F.R. § 1003

ORDER TIMOTHY C. BATTEN, SR., District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Defendants Jose Guadalupe Lara and Efrain Mejia-Ruiz’s1 objections [130] to Magistrate Judge Walker’s Report and Recommendation (the “R & R”) [128], which recommends that Defendants’ motions to suppress the wiretap evidence [108-112] be denied. I. Defendants

Case: 12-41194 Document: 00512755577 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/03/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 12-41194 FILED

REVISED AUGUST 13, 2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 11-40632 July

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge, dissenting, joined by EDITH H. JONES, Chief Judge, and EDITH BROWN CLEMENT, Circuit Judge, and joined as to parts LA, I.B, and I.D by EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge: I respectfully dissent. For the first time ever, this court reverses a below-guideline sentence for alleged unfairness. And for at least the 181st time, it reverses a case on plain error, despite the Supreme C

SMITH, Circuit Judge. John Lee Skinner was convicted by a jury on two counts: (1) conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribute a controlled substance (crack cocaine) and (2) possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance (crack cocaine). The district court 1 sentenced Skinner to the mandat

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 05-2089 ___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * Distri

908 F.Supp. 877 (1995) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. William GALBRETH, Defendant. Crim. No. 94-197 MV. United States District Court, D. New Mexico. October 4, 1995. *878 David A. Freedman, Albuquerque, NM, for plaintiff. Mary L. Higgins, Asst. U.S. Atty., Albuquerque, NM, for defendant. MEMORAN

Case: 19-60519 Document: 00515941651 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/16/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED

MEMORANDUM OPINION SAVAGE, District Judge. The central and dispositive issue in this action is whether a permanently and totally disabled child who is older than seventeen and qualifies as a dependent under section “152(c) of the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) also qualifies for the child tax credit under section 24 despite the age limitation of seventeen in section 24. Considering the plain lan

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Illinois Official Reports Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity

742 F.Supp.2d 201 (2010) Kevin Leon DUCHESNE, Plaintiff, v. BANCO POPULAR DE PUERTO RICO, INC., et al. Defendants. Civil No. 04-2161 (PG). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. September 13, 2010. *202 Jose G. Fagot-Diaz, Fagot Law Office, Victor J. Casal-Vazquez, Casal Law Office, San Juan, PR, for Plaintiff. Enri

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DANIEL CAMPBELL; et al, * No. 15-56990 Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. v. 2:04-cv-08592- AG-AJW CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant-Appellee. CESAR MATA,

488 F.Supp.2d 1197 (2007) Elroy RENTERIA-MARIN. et al., Plaintiffs, v. AG-MART PRODUCE, INC., et al., Defendants. Marino Perez-Alvino, et al., plaintiffs, v. Ag-Mart Produce, Inc. and Green Stripe, Inc., Defendants. Nos. 3:01-CV-1392-J-25MCR, 3:02-CV-627-J-25MCR. United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division. May 14, 2007.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND AMENDED ORDER1 JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant Martin Smith’s Motion for Summary Judgment Requesting Dismissal of Plaintiffs’ Complaint on Qualified Immunity and Other Grounds, and Memorandum in Support, filed May 12, 2014 (Doc. ll)(“Motion”). The Court held a hearing on November 24, 2014. Th

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER1 JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Defendants’ Opposed Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights, filed August 16, 2013 (Doe. 26) (“MTD”); and (n) the Plaintiffs Opposed Motion to Amend Complaint and Memorandum Brief in Support Thereof, filed May 30, 2014 (Doc

126 F.Supp.2d 51 (2001) MACNEILL ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. Plaintiff, v. TRISPORT, LTD., Defendant. No. CIV.A. 98-12019-WGY. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. January 10, 2001. *52 Robert M. Asher, Julia Huston, Kerry L. Timbers, Bromberg & Sunstein, Boston, MA, for plaintiff and Counter-defendant. John H

ACCEPTED 12-14-00220-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 9/4/2015 3:01:53 PM

639 F.Supp. 244 (1986) Nicholas A. PALMIGIANO, et al. v. J. Joseph GARRAHY, et al. Thomas R. ROSS, et al. v. J. Joseph GARRAHY, et al. C.A. Nos. 74-0172 P, 75-0032 P. United States District Court, D. Rhode Island. May 12, 1986. *245 Alvin J. Bronstein, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs. David Prior, Asst. Atty.

97 Ill.2d 212 (1983) 454 N.E.2d 258 In re WALTER POLOVCHAK, Appellee and Appellant (The People of the State of Illinois, Appellant and Appellee). Nos. 56552, 56572. Supreme Court of Illinois. Opinion filed May 27, 1983. Rehearing denied September 30, 1983. *213 *214</