Zambrano v. I.N.S.

145 F.3d 1344, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 20081, 1998 WL 230879
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMay 7, 1998
Docket97-16526
StatusUnpublished

This text of 145 F.3d 1344 (Zambrano v. I.N.S.) 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
Zambrano v. I.N.S., 145 F.3d 1344, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 20081, 1998 WL 230879 (9th Cir. 1998).

Opinion

145 F.3d 1344

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Marta ZAMBRANO; Margarita Rodriguez; Graciela Lopez;
Andrea Ruiz; Martha Ozuna; Jorge Perdoma;
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE; Janet Reno,
Attorney General of the United States; Doris Meissner,
Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization Service;
Gustavo De La Vina, Regional Commissioner, Immigration and
Naturalization Service, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 97-16526.
D.C. No. CV-88-00455-EJF.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted** January 15, 1998.
Decided May 7, 1998.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Edward J. Garcia, District Judge, Presiding.

Before HALL, WIGGINS, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.

ORDER*

Appellants' February 2, 1998, motion for summary disposition is GRANTED. In light of this court's opinion in Catholic Social Services v. Reno, 134 F.3d 921 (9th Cir.1998), we vacate the district court's interlocutory orders and remand with instructions to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction.

Appellees' January 26, 1998, motion to file a supplemental brief is DENIED.

Appellants' February 13, 1998, motion for immediate issuance of the mandate is GRANTED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

**

This panel unanimously agrees that this case is appropriate for submission without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
145 F.3d 1344, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 20081, 1998 WL 230879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zambrano-v-ins-ca9-1998.