Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

ins Vs. Rios-pineda

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • May 13, 1985

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

30 entries 3 linked 27 unlinked
Show
  1. Jay Vs. Boyd US Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1956
  2. ins Vs. Bagamasbad US Supreme Court · Nov 01, 1976
  3. ins Vs. Phinpathya US Supreme Court · Jan 10, 1984
  4. U.S. 444 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court INS v. Rios-Pineda
    Search
  5. U.S. 444 (1985) Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Rios-Pineda
    Search
  6. are satisfied, it remains in the discretion of the Attorney General to suspend, or refuse to suspend, deportation. INS v. Jong
    Search
  7. the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the BIA and remanded the case for further proceedings. Rios-Pineda v. United
    Search
  8. exercise of discretion. The Court of Appeals reversed and directed the BIA to reopen the proceeding. Rios-Pineda v. United
    Search
  9. U. S. 449 We have recently indicated that granting a motion to reopen is a discretionary matter with BIA. INS v. Phinpathya
    Search
  10. of eligibility for suspension of deportation, the Attorney General had discretion to deny the motion to reopen. INS v. Jong
    Search
  11. as a matter of discretion, he need not consider whether the threshold statutory eligibility requirements are met. INS v. Bagamasbad
    Search
  12. incentive to prolong litigation in order to delay physical deportation for as long as possible. See, e.g., Sung Ja Oum v. INS
    Search
  13. Hibbert v. INS
    Search
  14. eligible for such suspension only because of the passage of time while their meritless appeals dragged on. See Leblanc v. INS
    Search
  15. Agustin v. INS
    Search
  16. Balani v. INS
    Search
  17. Der-Rong Chour v. INS
    Search
  18. Schieber v. INS
    Search
  19. INS v. Jong
    Search
  20. Even prior to our decision in INS v. Phinpathya
    Search
  21. that such an absence was an interruption of the period of continuous presence, the law itself was clear. See Heitland v. INS
    Search
  22. Segura-Viachi v. INS
    Search
  23. Barragan-Sanchez v. Rosenberg
    Search
  24. U.S. Supreme Court INS v. Rios-Pineda
    Search
  25. Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Rios-Pineda
    Search
  26. Rios-Pineda v. United
    Search
  27. BIA. INS v. Phinpathya
    Search
  28. Sung Ja Oum v. INS
    Search
  29. See Leblanc v. INS
    Search
  30. See Heitland v. INS
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial