Cases

BACHARACH, Circuit Judge. A husband and wife, Mr. Alberto Martinez Molina and Ms. Cristina Ramirez Rivera, are Mexican citizens subject to final orders of removal from the United States. After an immigration judge declined to cancel their removal orders, Mr. Martinez and Ms. Ramirez filed a motion to reopen based on ineffective representation of counsel. With the motion, Mr. M

MEMORANDUM ** Hector Baltazar Molina, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3

MEMORANDUM ** Cecilia Molina, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her motion to reopen deportation proceedings conducted in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen proceedings to resc

MEMORANDUM ** Jacqueline Molina (“Molina”) petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision finding her ineligible for benefits under the class action settlement in Barahona-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 243 F.Supp.2d 1029 (N.D.Cal.2002) (“Bara-hona-Gomez ”). The parties are familiar with the facts of this case, which we repeat here only to the extent necessary to explain our de

MEMORANDUM ** Jacqueline Molina (“Molina”) petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision finding her ineligible for benefits under the class action settlement in Barahona-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 243 F.Supp.2d 1029 (N.D.Cal.2002) (“Bara-hona-Gomez ”). The parties are familiar with the facts of this case, which we repeat here only to the extent necessary to explain our de

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioners, Edwin Orlando Salto-Moli-na (“Edwin”), Flanclin Bladimir Salto-Molina (“Flanclin”), Jhonny Omar Guerrero-Salto (“Jhonny”) and Wilson Genaro Pilleo-Salto (“Wilson”), natives and citizens of Ecuador, seek review of final orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) entered, as to Wilson, on June 10, 2008, and, as to the other three petitioners, on June 19, 2008, affirming the decision of an Immigration Ju

MEMORANDUM ** David Cleyton Castro-Molina, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial ev

597 F.3d 128 (2010) William HERRERA-MOLINA, a.k.a. Eduardo Salazar, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.[1] No. 07-0985-ag. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued November 16, 2009. Decided March 3, 2010. *130 Haroutyun Asatrian, Strasse

MEMORANDUM ** David Cleyton Castro-Molina, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial ev

SUMMARY ORDER Petitioners, Edwin Orlando Salto-Moli-na (“Edwin”), Flanclin Bladimir Salto-Molina (“Flanclin”), Jhonny Omar Guerrero-Salto (“Jhonny”) and Wilson Genaro Pilleo-Salto (“Wilson”), natives and citizens of Ecuador, seek review of final orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) entered, as to Wilson, on June 10, 2008, and, as to the other three petitioners, on June 19, 2008, affirming the decision of an Immigration Ju

580 F.3d 913 (2009) Victor LANDIN-MOLINA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. *914 Petra Estrada-Mendoza, Petitioner, v. Eric H. Holder Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. Nos. 05-73677, 05-75825. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 12, 2009.[*] Fi

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VICTOR LANDIN-MOLINA,  Petitioner, No. 05-73677 v.  Agency No. ERIC H. HOLDER JR., Attorney A079-652-076 General, Respondent.  PETRA E

WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge, dissenting. The majority recognizes the validity of all aspects of Molina’s retroactivity claim, save one: whether application of IIRIRA would affect his substantive rights by retroactively eliminating his ability to argue for relief from removal. The majority concludes that it would not. Because I believe that such a holding is contrary to Eighth Circuit precedent, I respectfully disse

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied. Same case below, 306 Fed. Appx. 389.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kenneth Leopold Gentles, a native and citizen of Jamaica, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s order denying a continuance. We deny the petition for review.

SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is GRANTED, the decision of the BIA is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this order. This is an immigration case about the phrase “confined, as a result of conviction.” Under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)(7), a person who is “confined, as a result of conviction” for 180 days or more within a

LYNCH, Chief Judge. On September 2, 2011, an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denied Antonio D. Moura’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissed Moura’s appeal from the IJ’s decision on July 22, 2013. Moura petitions for review of the BIA’s decision, contesting only its den

MEMORANDUM ** Deny Arianto, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agen

CHIN, Circuit Judge. Petitioner Kelechi Gerald Nwozuzu was born in Nigeria and came to this country when he was four years old. When he was seventeen, his parents were naturalized as United States citizens. The question presented is whether Nwozuzu’s failure to become a lawful permanent resident before turning eighteen years old bars him from claiming derivative citizenship from

PER CURIAM: This appeal requires us to interpret a rule, promulgated pursuant to the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act of 1997 (“NACARA”), Pub.L. No. 105-100, 111 Stat. 2193, that permits the Attorney General, in his discretion, to cancel an alien’s removal from the United States in certain circumstances, so long as the alien is not “inadmissible </