| 9th Cir: Real ID had implicit 30 day window to seek review, but no nunc pro tunc for old petition |
|
|
| Wednesday, 23 July 2008 | |||||
|
Singh v. Mukasey (9th Cir. 7/23/08) FISHER Reinhardt Noonan The 9th Cir agreed with the 2d and 3d Cirs that the Real ID Act implicitly contained a 30 day period in which previously-barred individuals could file a new Petition for Review. Accord Kolkevich v. Att’y Gen., 501 F.3d 323, 335 (3d Cir. 2007), Ruiz-Martinez v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2008). But because PfR was filed after 30 days, that couldn't help him. He also asked the CtApp to "reinstate" a dismissed Petition for Review, but CtApp refused to do so (because he waited more than 2 months to ask), and also refused to treat request to reinstate PfR as a PfR itself (and it'd have been too late, anyway). CtApp refused to reinstate it nunc pro tunc, because the earlier decision "was not dismissed through any clerical mistake or error of law, but rather was properly dismissed under the law as it existed at the time".
Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.12 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved. |
|||||
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|