De Amador v. Holder

Ninth Circuit

De Amador v. Holder

318 F. App'x 503

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 9, 2009

DocketNo. 08-71093

StatusPublished

This text of 318 F. App'x 503 (De Amador v. Holder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

De Amador v. Holder, 318 F. App'x 503 (9th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

[504]*504MEMORANDUM

**

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing an appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of petitioner’s application for adjustment of status.

Respondent’s motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). Adjustment of status is not available to an alien who is inadmissible because she has reentered after being ordered removed. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(C)(i)(II); see also Duran Gonzales v. Department of Homeland Security, 508 F.3d 1227 (9th Cir.2007). Accordingly, this petition for review is denied.

All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

[504]*504MEMORANDUM

**

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing an appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of petitioner’s application for adjustment of status.

Respondent’s motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). Adjustment of status is not available to an alien who is inadmissible because she has reentered after being ordered removed. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(C)(i)(II); see also Duran Gonzales v. Department of Homeland Security, 508 F.3d 1227 (9th Cir.2007). Accordingly, this petition for review is denied.

All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

318 F. App'x 503, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-amador-v-holder-ca9-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack