Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gilberto Acosta-Olivarria v. Loretta E. Lynch

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 26, 2015No. 10-70902Published

1Dissent

RICE, District Judge,,

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent. On balance, the Montgomery Ward factors do not weigh in favor of departing from the general principles of retroactivity. Applying In re Briones, 24 I. & N. Dec. 355 (BIA 2007), the BIA properly found Acosta-Olivarria *1278inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) and thus ineligible for adjustment of status under 8 U.S.C. § 1255(0.

As an initial matter, it is important to recognize “[t]he general rule ... that an appellate court must apply the law in effect at the time it renders its decision.” Thorpe v. Hous. Auth. of Durham, 393…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. United States v. Schooner PeggySupreme Court of the United States · 1801
  2. Local 900, International Union of Electrical, Radio and MacHine Workers, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations BoardCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1984
  3. Gregorio Perez-Gonzalez v. John Ashcroft, Attorney GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  4. BRIONESBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2007
  5. Montgomery Ward & Co., Incorporated v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API