Igli Filja, Luljeta Filja, Endrit Filja v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the change in country conditions is measured from the time of proceedings before IJ
• explaining that we can only “reverse[]” an order denying a motion to reopen if the BIA’s decision is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law” (citation omitted)
• providing that the relevant “previous proceeding” is the hearing before the IJ
• granting ineffective-assistance claim and remanding to the BIA for consideration of petitioner’s claims for relief
• The BIA need not “write an exegesis on every contention” raised, but “merely . . . consider the issues raised, and announce its decision in terms sufficient to enable a reviewing court to perceive that it has heard and thought and not merely reacted.”
• “[t]he BIA is not required to write an exegesis on every contention. What is required is merely that it consider the issues raised, and announce its decision in terms sufficient to enable a reviewing court to perceive that it has heard and thought and not merely reacted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).