Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Phinpathya

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that “[c]ounsel’s unsupported assertions in respondent’s brief” are not evidence of the applicant’s entitlement to relief
• noting that statements by counsel are not evidence and are not entitled to evidentiary weight
• noting that unsupported statements from counsel in an appellate brief do not constitute facts in evidence
• noting that, in request to reopen, “[c]ounsel’s un‐ supported assertions in respondent’s brief do not establish that respondent could satisfy” the requirements for relief
• stating that the starting point in cases involving statutory construction must be the language employed by Congress, and that it is assumed that the legislative purpose is expressed by the ordinary meaning of the words used
• considering an applicant’s argument meritless when “there [was] no basis in the present record” and the argument was based only on “unsupported assertions in [his] brief”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).