Legal Opinion
Jianping Li v. Keisler
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 27, 2007No. 04-73258, 04-74457, 06-71068PublishedCited by 57 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
We consider applications for attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in three immigration petitions for review. Because the applications present similar issues, we consider them together.
Li v. Keisler
Petitioner Li, an asylum applicant from China, filed a motion to reopen following the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) in absentia order of removal in his case. Petitioner asserted that he failed to appear for the hearing due to “exceptional circumstances,” consisting of a high fever, drainage from his ear, loss of balance, headache and dizziness.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. VenturaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Commissioner, Immigration & Naturalization Service v. JeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Navaratwam Kamalthas v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Ardestani v. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- Jeffrey Meier v. Carolyn W. ColvinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center v. United States Bureau of Land ManagementCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Rahinah Ibrahim v. US Dept. of Homeland SecurityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Craig Tobeler v. Carolyn W. ColvinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Aronov v. NapolitanoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2009
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.