Sefit Ramani Lindita Ramani and Ardit Ramani v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that \only claims properly presented to the BIA and considered on their merits can be reviewed by this court in an immigration appeal\
• holding \that only claims properly presented to the BIA and considered on their merits can be reviewed by this court in an immigration appeal\
• holding “only claims properly presented to the BIA and considered on their merits can be reviewed by this court in an immigration appeal”
• reasoning that “to the extent that [petitioner] has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, this court does not have jurisdiction to address those claims”
• holding “that only claims properly presented to the BIA and considered on their merits can be reviewed by this court in an immigration appeal”
• interpreting the administrative-exhaustion requirement set forth in Section 242(d)(1) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1), to mandate that “only claims properly presented to the BIA and considered on their merits can be reviewed by this court in an immigration appeal”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).