Lopez-Loera v. Holder

Ninth Circuit

Lopez-Loera v. Holder

667 F.3d 1330, 2012 WL 400653, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2585

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 9, 2012

Docket07-71613

StatusPublished

This text of 667 F.3d 1330 (Lopez-Loera 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

Lopez-Loera v. Holder, 667 F.3d 1330, 2012 WL 400653, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2585 (9th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The government has moved to remand this case in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Judulang v. Holder, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 476, 181 L.Ed.2d 449 (2011). Because the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision rested solely on Matter of Blake, 23 I. & N. Dec. 722 (BIA 2005), we agree with the government that “remand of this case to the Board for further proceedings concerning Lopez-Loera’s eligibility for relief under former 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1994) in accordance with Judulang v. Holder ... is warranted.”

We also agree with the government that the Petitioner waived any claim that this matter should have been processed as a question of inadmissibility rather than deportability when he admitted that he was deportable.

Under the circumstances, we take no position on any decision of the BIA that rests on Abebe v. Mukasey, 554 F.3d 1203 (9th Cir.2009) (en banc).

The government’s motion to remand is therefore GRANTED and the case is REMANDED.

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

ORDER

The government has moved to remand this case in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Judulang v. Holder, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 476, 181 L.Ed.2d 449 (2011). Because the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision rested solely on Matter of Blake, 23 I. & N. Dec. 722 (BIA 2005), we agree with the government that “remand of this case to the Board for further proceedings concerning Lopez-Loera’s eligibility for relief under former 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1994) in accordance with Judulang v. Holder ... is warranted.”

We also agree with the government that the Petitioner waived any claim that this matter should have been processed as a question of inadmissibility rather than deportability when he admitted that he was deportable.

Under the circumstances, we take no position on any decision of the BIA that rests on Abebe v. Mukasey, 554 F.3d 1203 (9th Cir.2009) (en banc).

The government’s motion to remand is therefore GRANTED and the case is REMANDED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

667 F.3d 1330, 2012 WL 400653, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lopez-loera-v-holder-ca9-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack