Gulzar Singh v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that denial of 14 No. 06-2254 motion to reopen was an abuse of discretion where evi- dence showed that immigration authorities sent a hear- ing notice to an old address
• remanding to “reopen removal proceedings and to rescind the removal order” when alien had established that he did not receive notice of removal hearing
• alien could not be charged with constructive notice of NTA mailed to his former address, even though he had provided the address in an asylum application
• although NTA was mailed to alien’s former address, he could not be charged with constructive notice, because he had not been instructed to keep his address updated nor informed of the removal consequences of failing to do so
• applying current provisions in 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229 & 1229a

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).