Pritam Taggar 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.

• holding that we review for abuse of discretion an IJ’s decision to deem documents waived as untimely under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.31, which applies to “the filing of all documents . . . before the immigration courts”
• holding that “[n]either the IJ nor the [BIA] abused their discretion in holding that Taggar had waived her application for relief and protection” because she “did not file her application for relief by . . . the extended due date”
• determining that there was no abuse of discretion in finding application abandoned for failure to file it by the deadline
• concluding there was no abuse of discretion when the petitioner failed to file her application by the filing deadline set by the IJ
• holding this Court reviews for abuse of discretion “an IJ’s decision to deem applications waived for failing to adhere to deadlines imposed under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.31”
• finding no abuse of discretion in IJ’s decision to reject applications for relief from removal filed after court-ordered deadline

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).