Luis Juarez Alvarado v. Eric Holder, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the court lacked jurisdiction over an unexhausted claim even after liberally construing the petitioner’s pro se argument
• holding that we could not consider the charging papers where the original charge was for possession but where the plea for attempted possession referred to “Modified Count One” (emphasis added)
• explaining that exhaustion is not required “if the BIA—bound by our prior precedent—would be precluded from granting relief”
• explaining that our court’s precedent “has squarely held that issue exhaustion is a jurisdictional requirement”
• holding that the petitioner must raise the argument before the BIA such that he has “sufficient[ly] . . . put the BIA on notice that he was challenging [the issue]” and the BIA had “‘an opportunity to pass on th[e] issue.’” (citation omitted)
• dismissing petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction where petitioner did not sufficiently exhaust before the BIA his argument challenging the IJ’s decision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).