Zaza v. Gonzales

Ninth Circuit

Zaza v. Gonzales

154 F. App'x 594

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedNovember 15, 2005

DocketNo. 05-70350

StatusPublished

This text of 154 F. App'x 594 (Zaza v. Gonzales) 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

Zaza v. Gonzales, 154 F. App'x 594 (9th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

Adel Ahmad Zaza, a native of Syria and a citizen of Jordan, and his family petition [595]*595for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision adopting and affirming the immigration judge’s decision to deny their motion to reopen. The petitioners seek to apply for suspension of deportation pursuant to the class action settlement approved in Barahona-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 243 F.Supp.2d 1029 (N.D.Cal.2002). As the Board and the immigration judge concluded, the petitioners are not members of the Barahona-Gomez class because they did not seek suspension of deportation until after March 31, 1997. See Sotelo v. Gonzales, No. 03-74083, slip op. 14449, 14456-57 (9th Cir. Oct. 21, 2005). We therefore deny the petition for review.

PETITION DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the [595]*595courts 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

MEMORANDUM

**

Adel Ahmad Zaza, a native of Syria and a citizen of Jordan, and his family petition [595]*595for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision adopting and affirming the immigration judge’s decision to deny their motion to reopen. The petitioners seek to apply for suspension of deportation pursuant to the class action settlement approved in Barahona-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 243 F.Supp.2d 1029 (N.D.Cal.2002). As the Board and the immigration judge concluded, the petitioners are not members of the Barahona-Gomez class because they did not seek suspension of deportation until after March 31, 1997. See Sotelo v. Gonzales, No. 03-74083, slip op. 14449, 14456-57 (9th Cir. Oct. 21, 2005). We therefore deny the petition for review.

PETITION DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the [595]*595courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 F. App'x 594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zaza-v-gonzales-ca9-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack