Legal Opinion
Ekasinta v. Ashcroft
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided July 19, 2005No. 04-9515PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARTZ, Circuit Judge.
Petitioner Paula Sharon Ekasinta seeks judicial review of a final order of removal. The immigration judge (IJ) denied each of her requests for various forms of relief. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed without opinion, leaving the IJ’s opinion as the final agency ruling. Because each of Petitioner’s requests was denied on at least one ground that was discretionary, we lack jurisdiction to review the order of removal. See Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 242(a)(2)(B), 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B). Consequently, we dismiss the petition.
I. BACKGROUND
On June…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Illinois v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Carlson v. LandonSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Murdock v. City of MemphisSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Joseph v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
- De La Vega v. GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Hadwani v. GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2006
- Marquez-Marquez v. GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2006
- De La Vega v. GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.