D-R
Citations
- 27 I. & N. Dec. 105
Syllabus
D-R-, 27 I&N Dec. 105 (BIA 2017) (1) A misrepresentation is material under section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) (2012), when it tends to shut off a line of inquiry that is relevant to the alien's admissibility and that would predictably have disclosed other facts relevant to his eligibility for a visa, other documentation, or admission to the United States. Forbes v. INS, 48 F.3d 439 (9th Cir. 1995), not followed. (2) In determining whether an alien assisted or otherwise participated in extrajudicial killing, an adjudicator should consider (1) the nexus between the alien's role, acts, or inaction and the extrajudicial killing and (2) his scienter, meaning his prior or contemporaneous knowledge of the killing. Miranda Alvarado v. Gonzales, 449 F.3d 915 (9th Cir. 2006), not followed.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- con- cluding that, in determining an alien’s assistance or participation in persecution, the “standard is one that considers (1) the nexus be- tween the alien’s role, acts, or inaction, and the extrajudicial killing; and (2
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Cited by
9 cases in this archive cite this case.
- ORTEGA-LOPEZBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2018-07-01· cited 16×
- A.J. VALDEZ and Z. VALDEZBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2018-07-01· cited 15×
- K.Y. v. U.S. Attorney GeneralEleventh Circuit· 2022-08-09· cited 13×
- NEGUSIEBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2018-07-01· cited 6×
- Gebrgzabher v. GarlandFifth Circuit· 2022-12-19· cited 1×
- O-R-EBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2021-07-21
- MENSAHBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2021-04-14
- X-Q-LBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2019-07-01
- Texperts, Inc.Board of Immigration Appeals· 2026-03-06
Cites
47 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 20,645×
- Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1999-06-10· cited 5,157×
- National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet ServicesSupreme Court· 2005-06-27· cited 1,506×
- Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States ex rel. EscobarSupreme Court· 2016-06-16· cited 797×
- United States v. WellsSupreme Court· 1997-02-26· cited 565×
- Fedorenko v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1981-01-21· cited 518×
- Negusie v. HolderSupreme Court· 2009-03-03· cited 322×
- Marmolejo-Campos v. HolderNinth Circuit· 2009-03-04· cited 280×
- Chaunt v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1960-11-14· cited 215×
- S-PBoard of Immigration Appeals· 1996-07-01· cited 183×
- Y-LBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2007-07-01· cited 178×
- J-B-N- & S-MBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2007-07-01· cited 165×
- Holder v. Martinez GutierrezSupreme Court· 2012-05-21· cited 103×
- Roberto Ferrer Miranda Alvarado Madeleine Janet Morales Lopez v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2006-06-02· cited 101×
- United States v. Osama Musa AlferahinNinth Circuit· 2006-01-11· cited 98×
- Maslenjak v. United StatesSupreme Court· 2017-06-22· cited 92×
- D-RBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2011-07-01· cited 90×
- United States v. Antonio Medina PuertaNinth Circuit· 1992-12-22· cited 79×
- Predrag Vukmirovic v. John Ashcroft, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2004-04-05· cited 78×
- Bogar Allax Monter v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United StatesSecond Circuit· 2005-11-14· cited 64×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.