Ninth Circuit· 7/26/2010
Rahimzadeh v. Holder
Citations
- 613 F.3d 916
- 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 15246
- 2010 WL 2890998
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “demonstrating that a country’s laws or customs effectively deprive the petitioner of any meaningful recourse to governmental protection”
- determining that authorities are willing and able to 2 control private persecutors when the “law and judiciary provide effective means of addressing instances of abuse”
- concluding the record did not compel the finding that the petitioner would be harmed by forces the government was unwilling or unable to control
- noting that evidence that “the law and judiciary” do not provide effective means of addressing human rights abuses can establish governmental inability or unwillingness to provide protection
- discussing various means by which a petitioner may fill the “gap in proof’ left by the absence of a report to the police
- discussing various means by which a petitioner may fill the “gap in proof’ left by the absence of a report to the police
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Tashima, Fisher, Berzon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
16 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez v. Jefferson SessionsNinth Circuit· 2017-03-08· cited 489×
- Emilia Velasquez-Gaspar v. William BarrNinth Circuit· 2020-09-30· cited 176×
- Afriyie v. HolderNinth Circuit· 2010-07-26· cited 127×
- Chanpreet Kaur v. Robert WilkinsonNinth Circuit· 2021-01-29· cited 70×
- Castro-Martinez v. HolderNinth Circuit· 2011-04-15· cited 50×
- J.R. v. William BarrNinth Circuit· 2020-09-11· cited 37×
- Ruth Jeanette Orellana v. William BarrFourth Circuit· 2019-05-23· cited 23×
- Hector Meza-Vazquez v. Merrick GarlandNinth Circuit· 2021-04-01· cited 22×
- Meza Diaz v. GarlandNinth Circuit· 2024-10-08· cited 17×
- Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez v. Loretta E. LynchNinth Circuit· 2015-11-19· cited 7×
- Castro-Martinez v. HolderNinth Circuit· 2011-12-05· cited 1×
- Adamu Sumaila v. Attorney General United StatesThird Circuit· 2020-03-31
- John Doe v. Attorney General United StatesThird Circuit· 2020-04-16
- Shverniks v. HolderNinth Circuit· 2011-02-15
- Guzman v. LynchNinth Circuit· 2016-04-26
- Meza Diaz v. BondiNinth Circuit· 2025-02-25
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Mario Ernesto Navas v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceNinth Circuit· 2000-06-20· cited 674×
- Marjorie Konda Lolong v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2007-05-07· cited 531×
- Abrahim Baballah Ula Baballah Ahmad Baballah v. John Ashcroft, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2004-05-06· cited 311×
- Maya Avetova-Elisseva v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceNinth Circuit· 2000-06-26· cited 288×
- Ashok Chand Premila Mudaliar Chand v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceNinth Circuit· 2000-08-02· cited 273×
- Ingrid Yamileth Castro Perez v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2005-06-01· cited 264×
- Francisco Ornelas-Chavez v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2006-08-21· cited 229×
- Damjan Knezevic and Danica Knezevic v. John Ashcroft, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2004-05-24· cited 191×
- Andriasian v. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceNinth Circuit· 1999-06-11· cited 184×
- Ranjit John Singh Chand Kumari, A/K/A Chand Kumari Singh Renika Singh v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceNinth Circuit· 1996-09-06· cited 154×
- Afriyie v. HolderNinth Circuit· 2010-07-26· cited 127×
- Mark Stephen Gomes Sworna Jacinta Gomes Methew Gomes v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralNinth Circuit· 2005-12-06· cited 69×
- Renteria-Morales v. MukaseyNinth Circuit· 2008-12-12· cited 56×
- S-ABoard of Immigration Appeals· 2000-07-01· cited 54×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.