Patel v. U.S. Attorney General

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when jurisdiction over final order is precluded, court lacked jurisdiction to review orders denying motions to reopen such final orders
• holding that when jurisdiction over final order is precluded, court lacked jurisdiction to review orders denying motions to reopen such final orders
• holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction because petitioner filed his habeas action after having been deported to India
• holding that habeas jurisdiction requires that the petitioner be in “custody” and that “custody” is determined as of the time of the filing of the petition
• holding that habeas jurisdiction requires that the petitioner be in “custody” and that “custody” is determined as of the time of the filing of the petition
• holding that motions to reopen are subject to the jurisdiction-stripping provision of § 1252(a)(2)(C)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).