Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Mondaca-Vega v. Holder

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 15, 2015No. 03-71369Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

MURGUIA, Circuit Judge,

joined in full by NGUYEN, Circuit Judge, and as to Parts A, B, and D by THOMAS, Chief Judge, and PREGERSON and W. ’ FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, concurring in part and dissenting in part:

This case involves “the vexing nature of the distinction between questions of fact *437and questions of law.” See Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 288, 102 S.Ct. 1781, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 (1982). On some questions, the answer is easy. How many times was Petitioner deported? Under what name? Did Petitioner successfully apply for a social security number? Has he ever been convicted of a crime…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. State Oil Co. v. KhanSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Teva Pharm. United States, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2015
  3. Baumgartner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  4. Jennie McCormack v. Mark HiedemanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
  5. Gorbach v. RenoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000

16 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