Rupinder Kaur Loveleen Kaur v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Ninth Circuit

Rupinder Kaur Loveleen Kaur v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

249 F.3d 830, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 8877

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 11, 2001

Docket99-70395

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 249 F.3d 830 (Rupinder Kaur Loveleen Kaur v. Immigration and Naturalization Service) 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

Rupinder Kaur Loveleen Kaur v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 249 F.3d 830, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 8877 (9th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER AMENDING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING AND AMENDED OPINION

ORDER

The opinion filed' January 24, 2001 is amended as follows:

1. At page 1154 of the slip opinion, in the middle of the paragraph that begins with the words “Second, the Kaurs made a showing”, delete the following two sentences:

In this case, the asylum officer’s adverse credibility finding was likely based on the resource materials that he consulted. Even though the IJ would have made an independent review of the asylum application, there was a high probability not only that the government would challenge the Kaurs’ credibility, but that the resource materials would be a cornerstone of the government’s effort to impeach their testimony.

2. Insert in place of the deleted sentences the following:

In this case, it would be reasonable to assume that the asylum officer used the resource materials which he consulted to arrive at his adverse credibility finding. Even though the IJ would have made an independent review of the asylum application, it would also be reasonable to *831 expect not only that the government would challenge the Kaurs’ credibility, but that the resource materials would be used by the government in its effort to impeach their testimony.

With the foregoing amendment, the Respondent INS’s petition for panel rehearing is denied.

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

ORDER AMENDING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING AND AMENDED OPINION

ORDER

The opinion filed' January 24, 2001 is amended as follows:

1. At page 1154 of the slip opinion, in the middle of the paragraph that begins with the words “Second, the Kaurs made a showing”, delete the following two sentences:

In this case, the asylum officer’s adverse credibility finding was likely based on the resource materials that he consulted. Even though the IJ would have made an independent review of the asylum application, there was a high probability not only that the government would challenge the Kaurs’ credibility, but that the resource materials would be a cornerstone of the government’s effort to impeach their testimony.

2. Insert in place of the deleted sentences the following:

In this case, it would be reasonable to assume that the asylum officer used the resource materials which he consulted to arrive at his adverse credibility finding. Even though the IJ would have made an independent review of the asylum application, it would also be reasonable to *831 expect not only that the government would challenge the Kaurs’ credibility, but that the resource materials would be used by the government in its effort to impeach their testimony.

With the foregoing amendment, the Respondent INS’s petition for panel rehearing is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 F.3d 830, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 8877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rupinder-kaur-loveleen-kaur-v-immigration-and-naturalization-service-ca9-2001.

Opinion

2. Insert in place of the deleted sentences the following:

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack