Espinal v. Holder

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding Court retained jurisdiction where subsequent order “left intact the earlier order’s general legal analysis” and “[n]o material change occurred”
• “[T]he [subsequent] Order did not vacate or materially change [the prior] Order. We thus retain appellate jurisdiction.”
• “[T]he [subsequent] Order did not vacate or materially change [the prior] Order. We thus retain appellate jurisdiction.”
• “In addition to filing a petition for review in this court, an alien may simultaneously seek reconsideration by the BIA.”
• “[T]his court retains jurisdiction over a petition for review so long as the BIA’s grant of reconsideration does not materially change, or effectively vacate, the order under review.”
• “[T]his court retains jurisdiction over a petition for review so long as the BIA’s grant of reconsideration does not materially change, or effectively vacate, the order under review.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).