Cometa v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

43 F. App'x 94

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Cometa v. Immigration & Naturalization Service. Read the opinion of the Court — 34 F. App'x 316 →

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided July 30, 2002·No. No. 01-71242; INS No. A70-947-879·Published

Opinion

ORDER AMENDING MEMORANDUM AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING

The memorandum disposition filed on April 19, 2002, is amended as follows:

Page 5, Lines 13-16: Replace “However, because there is room for doubt as to whether the INS established that the conditions in the Philippines had improved to such an extent as to overcome the presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution, further proceedings are necessary. See id.” with:

“However, on the basis of our review of the record, we hold that further proceedings are necessary.”

With this amendment, the petition for rehearing is DENIED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER AMENDING MEMORANDUM AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING

The memorandum disposition filed on April 19, 2002, is amended as follows:

Page 5, Lines 13-16: Replace “However, because there is room for doubt as to whether the INS established that the conditions in the Philippines had improved to such an extent as to overcome the presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution, further proceedings are necessary. See id.” with:

“However, on the basis of our review of the record, we hold that further proceedings are necessary.”

With this amendment, the petition for rehearing is DENIED.

Cometa v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 43 F. App'x 94 (9th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

43 F. App'x 94 (Cometa v. Immigration & Naturalization Service) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.