United States v. Exxon Corp. & Subsidiaries

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that filing of motion to reopen does not automatically toll voluntary departure period
• holding by a divided panel that a motion to reopen does not toll the voluntary departure period
• holding by a divided panel that a motion to reopen does not toll the voluntary departure period
• holding that the BIA is not required to toll the voluntary departure period because such tolling would be “in tension with, if not opposed to, limits on the length of and authority to extend voluntary departure,” contrary to Congress’ intent
• stating that “if the alien does not depart promptly, ... the [government becomes more involved in further and more costly procedures by his attempts to continue his illegal stay here, [and] the original benefit to the [g]overnment is lost”
• “Voluntary departure is the result of an agreed-upon exchange of benefits between an alien and the Government.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).