Diaz-Covarrubias v. Mukasey

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to review denials of administrative closure because there was no “sufficiently meaningful standard” against which to judge the BIA’s decision
• holding judicial review was unavailable with respect to the BIA’s decision to deny a request for administrative closure where the only standard applied to the decision was “administrative convenience”
• “[T]he ‘no law to apply’ problem under Heckler does not arise where there are ‘established agency policies’ against which to evaluate the agency’s action.”
• this court lacks jurisdiction to review the denial of administrative closure for lack of a sufficiently meaningful standard to evaluate the decision
• this court lacks jurisdiction to review the denial of administrative closure for lack of a sufficiently meaningful standard to evaluate the decision
• this court lacks jurisdiction to review the denial of administrative closure for lack of a sufficiently meaningful standard to evaluate the decision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).