Cases

OPINION IKUTA, Circuit Judge: Osama AI Ramahi and Nisreen AI Sharif petition for review of the decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that extraordinary circumstances do not excuse their untimely applications for asylum. We deny the petition because substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that, even assuming the petitioners coul

615 P.2d 348 (1980) 47 Or.App. 607 Hanan RAMAHI, a Minor, by Lutfieh Ramahi, Her Conservator, Respondent, v. HOBART CORPORATION, a Corporation, Appellant, Indigo Industries, Inc., a Corporation; Yaser S. Asayed and Khuvaima Asayed, Dba Oasis Restaurant, Defendants. No. 77-0785; CA 12895. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted April 16, 1980

LYNCH, Circuit Judge. *554 The primary issue in this immigration case is whether the statutory bar in 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(C) strips this court of jurisdiction

SHEPHERD, Circuit Judge. *1191 Samiul Alim Lesum filed a petition seeking judicial review of the denial of his application for asylum under 8 U.S.C. § 1158 , t

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ANDREW GRIMM, No. 23-35235 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:18-cv- 00183-MO v. CITY OF PORTLAND, OPINION Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oreg

650 F.Supp.2d 838 (2009) Scott ADAMS, Plaintiff, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. No. 3:08-cv-64-WGH-DFH. United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Evansville Division. August 3, 2009. *839 J. Michael Woods, Woods & Woods, Evansville, IN, for Plaintiff. Thomas E. Kieper, United States

RILEY, Chief Judge. Thomas Nash filed suit against Opto-mec, Inc., alleging the company fired him on account of his age in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), Minn. Stat. §§ 363A.01, et seq. The- district court 1 granted Optomec’s motion for summary judgment, finding Nash failed to establish a prima faci

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT B.R., No. 19-70386 Petitioner, Agency No. v. A200-822-829 MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, OPINION Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PATTIE PAGE WALCOTT, AKA Pattie No. 18-70393 Clark, AKA Pattie Watson, Petitioner, Agency No. A075-930-578 v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney OPINION General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PATTIE PAGE WALCOTT, AKA Pattie No. 18-70393 Clark, AKA Pattie Watson, Petitioner, Agency No. A075-930-578 v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney OPINION General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

*1104IKUTA, Circuit Judge, dissenting: According to the majority, the district court here erred because it “relied on language in our cases which provides that when a party is attempting to keep records attached to a ‘non-dispositive’ motion under seal, it need only show ‘good cause.’ ” Maj. op. at 1095. This comes as a surprise, because the “language

ORDER A sua sponte call for a vote on rehearing this case en banc was made by an active judge of this court. The call failed to receive a majority of the votes of the non-reeused active judges. Fed. R.App. P. 35. The sua sponte en banc call is rejected. O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge, joined by BYBEE and BEA, Circuit Judges, dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc: This

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SMITHKLINE BEECHAM No. 11-17357 CORPORATION, DBA GlaxoSmithKline, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellee, 4:07-cv-05702-CW v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, Defendant-Appellant. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM No. 11-17373 CORPORATION, DBA GlaxoSmithKline, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 4:07-

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RICHARD H. KYLE, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION In this action, Plaintiff Thomas Nash alleges that his former employer, Defendant Optomec, Inc. (“Optomec”), terminated his employment on account of his age in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”), Minn. Stat. § 368A.01 et seq. Presently before the Court ⅛ Opto-mec’s Moti

Cite as 26 I&N Dec. 294 (BIA 2014) Interim Decision #3800 Matter of Tatiana ACEIJAS-QUIROZ, Beneficiary of a visa petition filed by Aubrey Edward Haverly, Petitioner Decided May 20, 2014 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals In adjudicating cases involving the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safet

665 F.Supp. 907 (1987) E.J. JONES, Sr., Plaintiff, v. CARGILL NUTRENA FEED DIVISION, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 87-00617-BH. United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, S.D. August 11, 1987. *908 Bayless E. Biles, Bay Minette, Ala., for plaintiff. David Scott Wright, Mobile, Ala., for defendants. ORDER

OPINION RIORDAN, Justice. Plaintiffs Frontier Leasing, Inc. (Frontier Leasing) and Wayne Lovelady’s Frontier Ford Corporation (Frontier Ford) filed an action against defendants Francis Graham, Frank Farrar, and C.F.B., Inc. (C.F.B.) for monies due under certain lease agreements with Frontier Leasing and for amounts due for vehicle parts purchased on an open account with

OPINION OF THE COURT MANSMANN, Circuit Judge. In this matter growing out of the 1979 incident at the Three Mile Island nuclear facility near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, we are asked once again to resolve a confrontation between an assertion of federal jurisdiction over public liability actions by defendants and a challenge to that jurisdiction by plaintiffs who wish to be in the state court system. We previou