Betouche v. Ashcroft

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that the BIA did not abuse its discretion where petitioner failed to comply with the Lozada requirements
• stating that petitioner’s proffered evidence in rejected Motion to Reopen constituted “a further attempt to relitigate the merits of the asylum claim [previously] rejected”
• denying petition to review Motion to Reopen because petitioner agreed “that the same conditions have been continuing ever since No. 05-4636 Page 6 [petitioner’s original asylum hearing]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).